Thursday, April 27, 2017
To Hear or Not to Hear
That is the question. [More]
The answer will tell us much.
If I had to dust off the old crystal ball, I'd guess they will, but the ruling will be such to allow states to determine their own "shall issue" criteria; that will preclude federally-mandated reciprocity; and a challenge to that will go unheard.
And yeah, it's just me guessing.
[Via Greg K]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
This should be an easy slam dunk.
The 7th circuit had it right, saying basically, "The State MUST facilitate the exercise of the RIGHT." So, if Illinois hadn't come up with a shall issue carry law right quick, Constitutional Carry would have been the law by default. I think the decision will be worded in such a way as to force Kommie-fornia, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Connecticut, et al, to align themselves wit the rest of the States.
And,
Constitutional Carry, as a movement, is growing. How long would it be before folks in rural New York start realizing that the (soon to be) majority of States are Constitutional Carry? They will begin asking themselves, "Why have we been begging, and being denied, permission from Government Thugs who are supposed to facilitate us?"
Unless the Peruta side totally flubs the argument, it should be a slam dunk.
The Constitution is supposed to provide Federal Supremacy for things reserved to the federal government, including the Bill of Rights. Those powers not delegated to the Federal Government, nor prohibited by the Constitution to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people
As far as the Constitution, its Federal Powers, its restraint upon the Federal Government, the rights reserved to the States or the people are dealt with in Article VI
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, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
The Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, is the Supreme Law of the Land. The Judges shall be bound thereby, all contrary amendments and state laws notwithstanding
Simple, except when activist courts want to bend the Constitution to "arguments grounded in social utility" as L Neil Smith calls them
"They will begin asking themselves, "Why have we been begging, and being denied, permission from Government Thugs who are supposed to facilitate us?””
These are the same people who have had 17 years to ask themselves, “Why did we choose to elect a hateful, crooked harridan from Arkansas as our US Senator from New York?”… and still haven’t.
Masochism and submissiveness are real things. Some people are just born that way.
Post a Comment