Similarly, Judge Richard A. Posner, in an article in The New Republic in August, wrote that Heller’s failure to allow the political process to work out varying approaches to gun control that were suited to local conditions “was the mistake that the Supreme Court made when it nationalized abortion rights in Roe v. Wade.”
Yeah, that's just what we need: "home rule" for
which rights will be recognized.
Hey, who needs a Fifth Amendment when you're in Chi-Town, anyway, huh? What, this rubber hose? It's in case the suspect gets
thirsty under all these lights...
We talked about the other supposed "conservative,"
J. Harvie Wilkinson III (and tell me that name doesn't sound like it belongs cheating at bridge at
Thurston Howell's country club)
a while back, and again
a while back further, and I gotta tell you, they just don't make "prominent" judges like they used to.
Consider, for example,
William Rawle, a contemporary of the Founders, the man
George Washington wanted as the first attorney general, and whose "View of the Constitution" was
the "go to" resource at Harvard and Dartmouth until the mid-Nineteenth Century, who wrote:
“No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give the Congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under a general pretence [sic] by a state legislature. But if in any pursuit of an inordinate power either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.”
We can listen to him or we can listen to Dickie and Harvie. Come to think of it, if we listen to them, we might actually resolve things sooner.
[Via Zachary G]
