Which way do we think Heller will swing?

[KDOFisch]

Sorry if this is a dupe post in some ways, I just haven't seen a poll yet.

After the hearing March 18th, we'll have a better idea which way the Court will swing. But what does everyone think will really happen?

Survey SAYS!

[bwiese]

You forgot the most relevant category: "indirect major outcome, as the outcomes will be the result of successor cases".

In and of itself, Parker/Heller is not intrinsically on a grand scale, it's what's enabled on down the road.

Parker/Heller is the freeway onramp, not the destination.

[simonov]

SCOTUS justices do not like making sweeping changes to existing law. I suspect the ruling will be broadly in our favor, but with careful language that allows most or all current gun control legislation (maybe even the DC ban) to stand, regardless of the narrow jurisdictional and incorporation issues.

I didn't vote because you have nothing like that in your poll. But I do believe it is by far the most likely outcome.

[bwiese]

I somewhat agree with Simonov on the direct limitation, but I believe we can successfully exploit the hell out of a favorable ruling in multiple successor cases.

[AngelDecoys]

I think the decsion will be narrow and only effect federal law. Incorporation is unlikely to be touched. The Heller ruling will probably only effect things on a minimal level. It might have some side benefits with regards towards policy.

Probably won't effect state restrictions, or city bans except in terms of law suits brought through federal court. (If I understand Silviera correctly, it rests on the collective rights position).

Incorporation will take years, and probably many cases (Much as 1st Amendment incorporation took the 20th century).

Concur with Bill, Heller is an onramp to the 'Freedom Highway.'

[Patriot]

I'm sanguine regarding Heller (with a hint of nuance for Firefly fans and lexophiles).

[BillCA]

You forgot the most relevant category: "indirect major outcome, as the outcomes will be the result of successor cases".

I suspect Mr. Wiese is correct here.

What I expect is that the court will find that the 2nd is (at the very least) and individual right consonant with the rest of the BOR. It will be delicious frosting on the cake if they rule it is also a fundamental right (I'm thinking odds are 6:4 on that). I also believe the court will support the lower court's ruling overturning the D.C. gun ban.

Acknowledgement of an individual right by SCOTUS would be a small crack with which to further wedge open the door to a complete pro-2nd Amendment ruling. At this point many of the existing gun laws - like 1-per-month; special ownership permits and others - can be challenged and build upon the initial ruling.

Acknowledgement as a fundamental individual right by SCOTUS would invite arguments that many so-called "gun control" laws are not the least burdensome or least invasive to citizens exercising their right.

It will be interesting to see if SCOTUS walks the tightrope -- i.e. hands down a decision which overturns the D.C. ban while also seeming to close the door on challenges to most of the existing laws. Or if SCOTUS takes a bold step to open the door to a new era where gun control must be focused on the unlawful actions of individuals instead of regulatory & administrative "crimes".

If, however, SCOTUS rules completely against the 2A, rendering it null & void, I fear that this would be demoralizing to a majority of people, indicating that the constitution is moot and the old Republic died in its sleep sometime between 1963 and 2008. The outcome of such a decision could very well start us down the path to a second civil war (not only over the gun issue, but many others).

[InvictusManeo]

I'm sanguine regarding Heller (with a hint of nuance for Firefly fans and lexophiles).

You're bloody?;)

I said major effect, but that is as a gateway case, not a direct and immediate impact.

[Grouch]

I think that 99% of this forum over estimates the results of a positive outcome, let alone the chances for it.

[GuyW]

....indicating that the constitution is moot and the old Republic died in its sleep sometime between 1963 and 2008. The outcome of such a decision could very well start us down the path to a second civil war (not only over the gun issue, but many others).

The old Republic died circa 1864, slayed by the US Army at the order of good ol' "Honest" Abe ....

The outcome of Heller might also be swayed by something as odd as some crackhead trying to break into a Justice's home. Then they might suddenly realize that their vaunted black pajamas aren't really so good at defense in the real world....

[USN CHIEF]

Hmmmm...

1. Election year, all the idiot front runners are anti guns

2. All the media organizations reporting every idiot that shoots and kills someone or their entire family.

The future does not look good for us.

[mymonkeyman]

The old Republic died circa 1864, slayed by the US Army at the order of good ol' "Honest" Abe ....

The outcome of Heller might also be swayed by something as odd as some crackhead trying to break into a Justice's home. Then they might suddenly realize that their vaunted black pajamas aren't really so good at defense in the real world....

Souter got accosted while jogging in DC a few years back. No gun involved. However, I still don't think that will make him pro-gun.

I expect a supermajority of the court will hold that the 2nd amendment protects an individual right. The arguments going the other way on this are so weak as to be too embarassing to sign off on.

The real question is affirm (uphold a 2nd amendment that has some vigor) or reverse/vacate (2nd amendment is either completely powerless or very weak).

This will probably all come down to Kennedy. I predict affirm in a Kennedy opinion which throws in dicta approving of various forms of gun restrictions.

[Big O]

Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. Don't miss out on your local gun shows.

[wolfmann]

I think SCOTUS will most likely kick it back down to the 9th circut and we will be left without strict scrutiny in further gun laws,in otherwords there will still be the same old haggleling over interpretation.

[PonchoTA]

I guess I'm in the minority here, I voted "Majority District of Columbia: little outcome nationally"
I think that SCOTUS will politicize the entire thing, NOT voting the way that they should Constitutionally, but the way that they think they should to prevent the impending chaos that is sure to arise within states like CA, MA, IL, etc.

I think that they will vote badly, and then they and the media will try to marginalize the whole thing and sweep it under the rug, NOT garnering the attention is should. I would almost be willing to bet that the NRA will be politically shut up as well, preventing them from raising a stink about the results for the promise of something 'better', that will also be ignored down the road.

I really, REALLY hope I'm wrong, but I'm cynical that way. :(

[mymonkeyman]

I think SCOTUS will most likely kick it back down to the 9th circut and we will be left without strict scrutiny in further gun laws,in otherwords there will still be the same old haggleling over interpretation.

That would be surprising since the case arose out of the DC circuit.

[jjperl]

It's just to bad the legal process of getting our 2nd amendment right, and any right for that matter, established/back takes many decades, compared to the time it takes the pen to deprive us of a right. I'll probably be on my deathbed by the time the full potential of Heller is realized... if that ever even happens in my lifetime.

[edwardm]

That's really a tough call. I suspect the Court is going to fixate on just a few of the well-briefed arguments (from both sides). My eyes will be open for anything that suggests 14th Amendment incorporation, as well as for applicability against the Acts of Congress, and the exercise of authority delegated to the Executive.

Assuming they find for the individual right, the most important thing to come out of the case may be the level of scrutiny this right requires. If they go for just rational basis, the road is uphill for the pro folks. Not impossible, but uphill. If they go for something more heightened, it at least levels the playing field.



Sorry if this is a dupe post in some ways, I just haven't seen a poll yet.

After the hearing March 18th, we'll have a better idea which way the Court will swing. But what does everyone think will really happen?

Survey SAYS!

[Glock22Fan]

I think SCOTUS will most likely kick it back down to the 9th circut and we will be left without strict scrutiny in further gun laws,in otherwords there will still be the same old haggleling over interpretation.


Just curious: Why would SCOTUS agree to hear the case, and then pass the buck back down? Unless they gave the lower court some direction, such as answering the question, narrow as it is?

Surely they can't just say "Hear the case again" without further comment?

Or, can they?

[mymonkeyman]

Just curious: Why would SCOTUS agree to hear the case, and then pass the buck back down? Unless they gave the lower court some direction, such as answering the question, narrow as it is?

Surely they can't just say "Hear the case again" without further comment?

Or, can they?

They can dismiss the cert. petition if it wasn't properly granted or becomes moot. That is unlikely to happen.

They can vacate and remand if they determine that the proper standard of law requires factual inquiries. This is what the Solicitor General wants.