Skip to comments.DC vs. Heller Ruling to be Issued June 26
Posted on 06/25/2008 7:33:33 AM PDT by DaveLoneRanger
The DC gun ban case ruling will be issued tomorrow, Thursday, June 26. Stay tuned!
The problem is all the 'greens' and liberals think Big Oil, is bad, no matter what they do. It's the reason we don't have refining or production capabilities, even on the leased land.
My Heller prediction is 7-2, with Kennedy writing for the majority, or Thomas. Ginsberg will write for the minority.
Kennedy was pretty passionate at the hearing about the 2A and Ginsberg tried to lead the DC lawyer down the 'regulated' path, but he was too stupid to take the cues. A first year law student would have looked like Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. next to that guy.
It will be interesting to see whether the more liberal justices who agree that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right apply strict scrutiny to the DC gun law or try and argue that it isn’t a fundamental right and deserves a lower level of scrutiny. The fact that it’s a right named in the Bill of Rights makes that quite a stretch, but for a “living constitutionalist” like Breyer, anything’s possible.
Also, while I can’t imagine any rational person believing that the DC gun ban is narrowly tailored to serving a compelling government interest, there seem to be at least a few constitutional scholars, like Lawrence Tribe, who believe just that.
I predict a gobbledygook ruling that maintains the status quo.
I'll be stopping in at Sportsmen's Warehouse on the way home just in case...
7-2 very unlikely. Probably 5-4, but it could possibly end up being 6-3.
Basing a thought on a ruling based on how they question the witnesses doesn’t always work. Sure, it looked like it would be 7-2 for us based on that, but it is extremely unlikely to actually work out that way.
With due respect for your opinion, the people of Louisiana decided otherwise.
The most analagous similar situation was the Finnish Civil War of 1918, in which Finland's Communists attempted to follow the example of their pals in Russia and sieze control of Finland's government. A series of events led to the actual bloodletting, and to this day Finn's don't even agree on the mame for the poeriod, but the dates generally given for the affray are January 27, 1918 to May 15, 1918.
The results after that four-month shootemup were several: the Reds lost, and about 1% of the population of Finland died in those four months. Note that the U.S. Civil War of 1861-1865 delivered a butcher's bill of around 2% of the population of the US at that time, though the Finns would presumably caught up in four more months. There were a couple of reasons, but the Winter conditions certainly didn't help matters any.
Too consider another point likely to be common to that civil war of the XX Century and anything similar forthcoming in the XXIst: Only about one death in four was a direct combat casualty, offset by the other three-fourths of the deaths often by intentional starvation or freezing in the prison camps and POW cages, and summary executions of traitors in the field. Indeed, one technique of the day was to let young recruits who'd had no previous military experience get some by executing condemned prisoners with their bayonets, helpfully also saving on rifle ammo. To this day, globalist leftists worldwide have had serious concerns about military weapons with bayonet lugs in the hands of those they'd rule, as happened during the period of the now-defunct U.S. *Assault Weapons Ban;* now you know why.
So if it comes to that, yes, you're right: ugly and murderous will indeed be the order of the day. The current population estimate is around 304,434,774. Accordingly, a period of intensity equal to that in Finland in 1918 could be expected to result in a number of at least somewhere around 30,443,477 fatal casualties. If, of course, it only lasts for four months....
I know I find the crime to be abhorrent and disgusting, but not deserving of the death penalty. Life with no parole and insertion into the general population will take care of that. saves a lot of money and time that way. And he'll be just as dead.
I don’t know which liberal position is more ludicrous: the Lawrence Tribe position that the DC gun ban essentially passes strict scrutiny, or the Erwin Chemerinsky position that infringement of the right to keep and bear arms is only entitled to rational basis review.
Even now that they finally agree with us on the construction of the 2nd Amendment, liberal academia can’t help but shamelessly twist 50 years of constitutional jurisprudence to attain their desired policy result. Of course, it just confirms my suspicion that they don’t teach law at Duke or Harvard anymore.
I seem to recall that during oral arguments a moderate (Kennedy?) was pretty much mocking the DC lawyers, saying that if we applied their standards to the 1st Amendment, we could ban books as long as they were under a certain size.
I have a bad feeling about this, but I think my bad feeling is from the stakes, not from a large chance that we will lose. It’s just that if this doesn’t go our way there will be no stopping the gun grabbers.
Man, I hope they’re right!
There's always the Boston Common solution. As long as we don't end up boxed in like Warsaw Ghetto, we could still correct things.
But that's really taking the matter out of the hands of the state and I don't think that SCOTUS was right to do that.
SCOTUS is so limiting the use of the death penalty that, I believe, they'll eventually outlaw it altogether, again.
And it's not their call, or, at least, shouldn't be.
The stakes are big either way, but one thing to keep in mind is that even the best possible outcome will not stop state and local governments from infringing the right to keep and bear arms, as the 2nd Amendment does not directly apply to the states. That will require a holding that that right is incorporated by the 14th Amendment, which the court can’t do in the case, since the 14th Amendment isn’t at issue.
From what I hear, the plan will be to make the next test case a challenge of Chicago’s gun laws. This is because Chicago’s gun laws are almost as bad as DC’s, Chicago will place the 14th Amendment at issue, and because the 7th Circuit (which sits in Chicago) is among the most conservative of the US Courts of Appeals.
I really couldn’t say. Heller isn’t the only opinion being delayed, but I’m not sure what the process is behind releasing a decision on one day or not.
Buy me an AR-15, extra clip, some ammo, and a 15+1 round Glock and I’ll pay you when I get the money. :-P
Yes, but how is it cruel and unusual punishment to execute a criminal with lethal injection for child rape, but appropriate (and not cruel ) to subject the same guy to a punishment where he will suffer months or years of physical abuse, rape or being murdered with a shiv, possibly all three?
Your post reminds me of George Ryan’s commutations, specifically one case where the criminal being taken off death row and put into general population was on death row because he had raped and murdered a 3 year old boy. Yeah, Ryan really showed how the state was concerned about cruel punishments there!
If someone deserves death they should be executed. If not, they should be incarcerated in a way that doesn’t make some thug a de facto state torturer and executioner. Having it both ways is cruelty.
I carry a revolver, mate. No safety.
I hope you’re right, not just because I hope we’ll win, but because it will be fun to watch Dick Daley sputter like Daffy Duck in the midst of a tantrum.
We have a long way to go before things reach that kind of boiling point.
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.