The case is State v. Sieyes; six Justices (including the Justice who dissented in part) took this view, two didn’t reach the question, and one signed the majority opinion but with the notation “result only,” which I take it also means that she didn’t express a view on the question. [More]Wonder how this will affect McDonald...?
[Via Ed Stone]
I no sooner get this posted than I see Dave Workman is on it.
Maybe, just maybe, there is a glimmer of hope/
ReplyDeleteNope, in Heller, the 9 robed dictators said its an individual right-that can be infringed by gov anyway that they like, and Scalia gave an outline of how to do the infringing.
ReplyDeleteI like this ruling, but Cliton and the UN are going to try to overide the 2A with that treaty, and I wouldn't put it past the Senate to go along for the ride.
ReplyDelete