I think the Supreme Court will do what they usually do when met with a hot issue such as this, make a very narrow ruling that answers the details of the specific case, but says little or nothing about the general concept of the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
Hmmm. Congress has legal jurisdiction over DC, doesn't it? Ideally, we'd love to see SCOTUS side with the individual-rights interpretation; but realistically, SCOTUS denying cert and dropping this political hot potato right back in Congress's lap might actually be the best outcome we could hope for. Consider: not wanting to handle this hot potato, SCOTUS denies cert; thus, the lower court's decision stands as precedent (even if it isn't, then at least DC is free[r]), and the Democrat-controlled Congress now has to deal with the twin problems of DC-citizens' guns suddenly being legal in Congress's own backyard, and of crafting a local UPD law which will withstand a court challenge. (Oh, and I almost forgot: "packing" the lower court with judges who think the "right" way so this embarrassment/failure to stay "on mission" doesn't happen again).
I think the Supreme Court will do what they usually do when met with a hot issue such as this, make a very narrow ruling that answers the details of the specific case, but says little or nothing about the general concept of the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
ReplyDeleteHmmm. Congress has legal jurisdiction over DC, doesn't it? Ideally, we'd love to see SCOTUS side with the individual-rights interpretation; but realistically, SCOTUS denying cert and dropping this political hot potato right back in Congress's lap might actually be the best outcome we could hope for. Consider: not wanting to handle this hot potato, SCOTUS denies cert; thus, the lower court's decision stands as precedent (even if it isn't, then at least DC is free[r]), and the Democrat-controlled Congress now has to deal with the twin problems of DC-citizens' guns suddenly being legal in Congress's own backyard, and of crafting a local UPD law which will withstand a court challenge. (Oh, and I almost forgot: "packing" the lower court with judges who think the "right" way so this embarrassment/failure to stay "on mission" doesn't happen again).
ReplyDeleteMark Odell