Posted on 06/04/2009 5:59:45 AM PDT by epow
On Wednesday, June 3, the National Rifle Association filed a petition for certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of NRA v. Chicago. The NRA strongly disagrees with yesterday's decision issued by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, holding that the Second Amendment does not apply to state and local governments
You begged.
As the Supreme Court already noted in 1833:
"The question of their application to States is not left to construction. It is averred in positive words."Poor you.
There's no mention of the Amendment applying to the "State" in the Second.
Another foot shot...
And you are ragging on the NRA for trying to get the Courts to fix themselves...
Got it. I didn't realize you'd recently had a lobotomy.
I asked what your point was. You clammed up.
The only thing that is fascinating is your incredible ability to ignore the obvious.
to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution;
Or do you need a refresher on Art 6 Para 2?
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
I haven't read the entire Heller decision recently, but IIRC Heller did confirm that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right. The problem now is that Heller didn't specifically cite the 2nd as a barrier to infringement by state or local authorities.
However it was a restriction on that right enacted by the D.C.'s LOCAL government, not the Federal government, that was nullified by Heller. Therefore it seems likely to me that the same Court majority will rule that the 2nd restricts the states' governments as well as the D.C.'s if and when the right case is granted certiorari. And what could be a better case for that than the NRA's appeal?
You always fall back on the BIG lie technique. The decision explicitly recognized the universal understanding of the framers. It was the opposite of the activism that you're begging for.
Like your obvious hatred of the Constitution and your complete inability to address documented historic facts?
Note that Mojave doesn’t actually refute what I said, but only tried bait me into a little war of juvenile name calling and personal attacks.
What anti-gun anti-constitutional troll were you before you became this one? I recognize your tripe from someone else long ago...
What facts? That the Marshall court was completely wrong?
Circular begging. States laws aren't contrary to restrictions on the powers delegated to Congress.
No, it’s subordinate to it.
And the Framers. And the Presser court. And the Cruikshank court. And every Supreme Court that ever visited the issue.
But you know better.
Sorry... You still lose.
Er... Where in the Second does it limit it to the FedGov? Art 6 Para 2 says "Laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding".
So eminent domain is natural law? And interstate commerce regulation?
Backwards. As always.
"The question of their application to States is not left to construction. It is averred in positive words."
As limitations on the powers that the Constitution delegated to Congress.
"Had Congress engaged in the extraordinary occupation of improving the Constitutions of the several States by affording the people additional protection from the exercise of power by their own governments in matters which concerned themselves alone, they would have declared this purpose in plain and intelligible language."You love having your nose rubbed in it.
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.