Skip to comments.Kagan On Guns: Court Precedents Are 'Settled Law'
Posted on 06/29/2010 2:09:05 PM PDT by Clump
Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan says she considers recent high court decisions expanding gun rights to be "settled law."
Kagan was asked at her confirmation hearing about two recent decisions, including a 5-4 ruling Monday, which essentially guaranteed citizens' Second Amendment rights to have guns, no matter where they live.
Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California decried growing gang violence in her state, saying officials need leeway to deal with it.
Kagan responded that "once a court decides a case as it did, it's binding precedent." And she said judges must respect a precedent unless it proves unworkable or new facts emerge that would change the circumstances of a case.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
She lies just like Sodomayor!! The Constitution means NOTHING to them.
It is not the court's role to decide if a law, much less a constitutional provision, is unworkable. That is a political decision. A judge must restrict himself to asking what does the law actually say.
I have no doubt she would have sided with the minority on the recent gun decision. But it’s striking how little attention this ruling is getting from the the leftysphere. There’s even a loud left majority in favor of the 2nd amendment. Add to that the obvious political dynamite involved in opposing the 2A, I do think the left has given up restricting guns as a policy goal.
> The Constitution means NOTHING to them.
Neither does TRUTH.
These people are unscrupulous, Godless, unGodly tyrant wannabes.
They should not be allowed to participate in lawmaking, jurisprudence, or execution of the law.
But the American people have been dumbed down by their TVs.
A somewhat appropriate name, but I like to call it American Idolatry.
I truly think that Kennedy went with the 4 conservatives in part because of his good friend Lawrence Tribe. Tribe is a renowned liberal law school professor who came out in favor of the individual rights interpretation over 10 years ago.
Those on the left who claim to be in favor of the RKBA are also in favor of advancing restrictions. They'd dismantle what's left of the RKBA, given the chance; as in expand the locales where DC-style permitting and registration (and approved gun lists) are practiced. They'd eliminate private sales, and other means that are useful to keep the government wondering.
Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan says she considers recent high court decisions expanding gun rights to be “settled law.”
If you are fool enough to believe this statement, you would believe Clinton and Gore. This fraud will say anything to get confirmed and become the liberal activist spoiler of our judicial system.
I heard that tired old lefty loon Bob Beckel on BOR last night still trying to argue that the Second Amendment was all about militias and not an individual right. Don’t think for a second that Kagan doesn’t believe the same.
She’s a liar.
Firstly, the premise is bogus. The recent high court decisions did not expand any gun rights, they merely moved towards reinstating them from facist power grabs.
Secondly, Kagan's statement is so stupid on so many levels. Whether you agree or disagree with the recent rulings the ink is barely dry on the ruling yesterday so how is it actually "settled law", implying some sort of long standing ruling?
The woman needs to be hammered and hammered again to show how wrong she is for the appointment.
I think her nose grew a little
I agree with you. If she said what the article says she said, she's lying and will vote to overturn any attempts to enshrine the second amendment as an individual right. She's not as clear as Sotomayor was about it, so the lie won't be as obvious, but it will be a lie nonetheless.
I am very disappointed with the GOP members of Judiciary for not pointing this out during the Kagan testimony. "The last person who sat in that chair answering our questions lied yesterday. Can you give us assurances you are not lying as well?"
Liberals will ALWAYS say what they have to say in order to get the position. Once they are in, they will do whatever they damn well please.
I have contacted Sessions and Hatch as well as my two senators and voiced my concerns about this nominee. I have strongly encouraged them all to filibuster, which means they each will have to grow a backbone.
I’d contact mine, but she’s right up Boxer and Feinstein’s alley. And Dianne, it may come as a shock to you, but the gang bangers you’re so worried about carry guns in their cars, on their persons, don’t bother to buy them legally and don’t bother to register them.
But you keep lumping the rest of law-abiding Americans in with them. Just like we’re all racist for wanting illegals deported. Must really suck to hate to have to ask us for your vote every 6 years.
Too bad Sotomayor can not be charged with perjury for what she said in her confirmation hearing vs her vote on the Chicago case. I think she was under oath during the questioning in the confirmation hearing.
Sotomayor claimed at her confirmation hearings that she supported the 2nd Amendment.
This month she sided with the losers, supporting Chicago’s failed gun ban. That makes Justice Sotomayor a liar.
Well, don’t trust Kagan either; she’s a liar too.
During the Clinton Administration she was against the 2nd Amendment, advising for very tight gun control. Now she states it is “settled law”.
I say BS.
It is time Republicans look at what a SCOTUS candidate has done in the past - not what that person claims to believe.
Kagan is a liar.
Throwing Feinstein out of office would be a good start.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.