Posted on 07/12/2018 6:18:39 PM PDT by Simon Green
President Donald Trump’s selection of Brett Kavanaugh to serve on the Supreme Court has been met with concern in a variety of progressive advocacy circles, but one group’s condemnation has been particularly swift and forceful: proponents of gun control. Organizations like the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety, and Giffords—the group founded by former Arizona congresswoman and gun violence survivor Gabby Giffords—all issued statements denouncing Trump’s pick. Protesters representing their cause counted themselves among the hundreds who assembled at the Supreme Court last night to object to the president’s choice.
The outcry might seem surprising, since the Supreme Court has barely heard any gun-related cases since 2008, when it upheld law-abiding citizens’ right to gun ownership in District of Columbia v. Heller while stipulating that such ownership should be regulated. But according to Brady co-president Avery Gardiner, a former lawyer, that may have had more to do with the moderate makeup of the court than an absence of legal challenges to gun control, and another Trump appointee may make the court more willing to take on such cases. The cases heading to the nation’s highest court are constitutional challenges to the “common sense” measures gun control activists have implored lawmakers to pass since the February school shooting in Parkland, Florida.
(Excerpt) Read more at motherjones.com ...
praying he can help with several things to get our country back more onto constitutionally valid ground
abortions
‘gun control’
immigration
etc
praying praying he;s the right nominee
Yes, he could, by upholding the Constitution.
Shall not be infringed does not need to be defined for me, I know what it means.
Libtards don’t have time for this now.
They are lurching left and fighting for their life.
The DC placements are going down. The President is enjoying England.
This is a good show. The President promised one and he has delivered.
Give Shit-Stroke the Purple Heart they say.........
I hopes he gets on the bench. I hope the court will hear more 2A cases. I’m in California and our only hope for relief is from SCOTUS.
Could you like this guy more?
I can only hope so.
However, judges the Republicans pick tend to “evolve” to the left once they get on the High Court.
OMG !!!! Brett Kavanaugh is a very powerful man he can do anything ,LOL
...Mother Jones: Kavanaugh Could Deal a Big Blow to Gun Control...
A painful death blow.
From the Mother Jones article:The Second Amendment] protects the kinds of weapons that were “in common use at the time”—in 1791, when the Second Amendment was adopted. Those are [former Supreme Court Justice Antonin] Scalia’s words. Judge Kavanaugh just uses the first part of that phrase, “in common use” and leaves out the “at the time” part.
In the Heller decision, Scalia quoted the Miller decision: 2. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56.
But from the Miller decision: The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. "A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline." And further, that ordinarily, when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.
The term "common use at the time" does not refer to the weapons used in 1791. It refers to weapons commonly used contemporaneously with the action. Thus a musket would not be in common use in our time but an AR-15 would be.
Liberals lie. It's what they always do.
They don’t want to see the real “big blow” to gun control.
I was waiting in a lawyers office maybe 20 years ago and began reading an issue of Mother Jones.
I am telling the absolute truth. There was an article which apparently reflected the magazine’s views.
It advocated infanticide! I am not talking about abortion but of babies under 2 years old.
Pure evil.
For the first time ever, I agree with that Communist rag.
Mega-dittoes from the SillyCon Valley!
This makes me feel a LOT better about supporting him.
Praise God from whom all blessings flow! Let gun control be destroyed at last!
Like Judge Thomas and Judge Scalia and Alioto? Too many people just love being Debbie Downers and not allow any happiness.
More like O’Connor, Kennedy and Souter.
Ping
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.