Posted on 06/04/2009 5:59:45 AM PDT by epow
And so it begins.
The NRA is calling for judicial legislation. Shameful.
What, you think state and local government should be able to ban guns?
Thats odd, it seems like they think the first amendment and it’s “no establishment of religion” clause, sure as hell applies to cities and states.
And it seems like 5th amendment cases are routinely enforced against municipal and state police departments.
Invalidating state laws that run afoul of the US Constitution (what’s ir actually says, not some imagined interpretation) is not judicial legislation. It’s what the courts are actually supposed to do.
Huh? Do you think that state and local governments should be able to say the 2nd amendment is void in the state/city?
That’s the puzzler on this ruling. If something is a constitutional right, then it cannot be abridged by the states.
The abortion crowd use that argument (successfully in most courts) all the time since Roe v. Wade essentially established abortion as a constitutional right.
Pretending that the 2nd Amendment was a restriction on the states
This after the US Supreme Court Heller decision, unfreakinbelievable!
The USSC needs to not only reverse this decision, it needs to come down hard on the 7th circuit judges who ignored their decision to drive this point home to the hardest heads in the federal and state judiciary, the 2nd protects the people from ALL governments at EVERY level that try to disarm them.
“Pretending that the 2nd Amendment was a restriction on the states”
yeah, that’d be like arguing that the 1st amendment restricted a states right to set up an offical church, or outlaw FR in that state.
I didn't see a sarcasm tag. Do you truly consider upholding the explicit Constitutional language of "shall not be infringed" to be judicial legislation?
The District of Columbia is not a state.
It was. Note the 1st says "Congress shall make no law", but the 2nd says "the right of the people shall not be infringed". It doesn't say just by Congress, but by anybody. That's because the Federal government needed to ensure that the people would be armed for the defense of the country. By ratifying it, the states agreed not to disarm the people.
Pretending that the 2nd Amendment was a restriction on the states
One more reason for all State Constitutions to protect the peoples right to keep and bear arms....
It didn't. The court "discovered" that restriction in the 14th Amendment. Leftists have little regard for original intent.
To overturn, does the USSC have to accept and argue a whole new case? Isn’t there a method where they can use Heller to quickly shoot this down?
Whose side are you on? You actually believe that the states can pick and choose which constitutional rights to honor.
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.