The NRA had a very good day in the Supreme Court - There appear to be at least five votes to significantly expand the Second Amendment. [More]
Unless "our side" got some Dolly pix I don't trust Roberts, and Barrett looks like she's getting set to show us what she wouldn't tell us in her confirmation hearings.
[Via Jess]
3 comments:
NRA? Where?
' The chief justice seemed committed to the approach the Supreme Court took in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), itself a precedent-setting case that undermined at least eight decades of Second Amendment jurisprudence and held that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to own a gun for personal “self-defense.” '
And there you have it. Their "expansion" of RKBA is with respect to the abomination (apologies to Princess Alia of the Knife) known formally as US v Miller. In doing so they ignore the intent of the founders and pretty much everyone's opinion on that from the ratification of the Constitution until 1939 when the court that decided Miller elected to clip RKBA's wings for the next 80 years.
In fact, Vox's opinion aside, SCOTUS is considering the RESTORATION of the Second Amendment prohibition of infringements of RKBA back to some semblance of what the founders understood it to be.
Nice try, Vox. Thanks for playing.
Did not Heller approve of 'reasonable regulation' up to but not including outright bars to possession and use?
Post a Comment