|
National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion Discuss national gun rights and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1521
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I would argue that such is the very basis for which they are Constitutionally empowered. Remember, Article III, Section I... "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish..." Judicial Power, as it has evolved and currently exists, is what you are getting at as opposed to original, intended meaning; i.e., the power the Judiciary has granted itself and which has been legislated by Congress... Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I don't agree, at least for the most part in that criticism. However, I do suspect that was part of the reason SCOTUS 'narrowed' the question in this, specific case. There was likely no desire to go that far down the road and wade through all that, again. It's precisely the reason so many are keeping their fingers crossed that we will see "to bear" applies outside the home; but, not necessarily anything definitive insofar as "manner of carry." Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
But, once again, we are drifting from the thread topic; though I have attempted to keep it tied in. So, I suggest we take this to a different thread if you want to continue in this vein. Last edited by TrappedinCalifornia; 11-18-2021 at 8:18 PM.. |
#1522
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Forcing every other forum member to make 15 full rolls of their scroll wheels. Just to get past YOUR LAST POST goes far beyond "WALL OF TEXT" EVEN FOR YOU! You shooting for a personal record or what? |
#1523
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Now you invite me to add even more to the thread without actually addressing the topic? BTW: Not my longest response and, as I have said, numerous times, it takes more than bumper sticker and/or Twitter length posts to unwind what was said and address it. Which, again, is why such discourse, should be taken to another thread, more in line with what is being promoted, in that it is becoming increasingly difficult to stay on topic due to the drift which has occurred and that you are now contributing to. |
#1524
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#1525
|
|||
|
|||
I don't know if my analysis is better than that of others on this thread, but I can summarize it in fewer words:
1. Strict scrutiny explicitly allows courts to "balance" your Second Amendment rights against the government's "compelling interest" in finding an unending number of ways and reasons to restrict those rights 2. THT makes it harder (but certainly not impossible) for courts to twist and stretch to restrict gun rights 3. Once the Supreme Court sets out the details of how THT applies in a specific context, that interpretation of THT is established and binding on lower courts 4. To the extent the Supreme Court has not addressed specific details, the lower courts have some flexibility in applying THT to cases raising those specific details. |
#1527
|
|||
|
|||
Just put him on your ignore list. Makes life a lot simpler.
|
#1528
|
|||
|
|||
Monday
SCOTUS is releasing one or more opinions on Monday.
So in fantasy world... Its 5-4 with Roberts in the 4. so Thomas gets to write the opinion. He's really pissed off its taken so long to hear a 2a case... He already wrote his opinion pre-emptively, so its ready now... So its a scathing opinion saying some means of carry is required EVERYWHERE. The only sensitive places are places with 100% invasive screening and armed guards. No restrictions on weapon type are allowed. If the military can have it so can the populace... NFA is toast... It will be here Monday at 10Am. Such fantasy is free we can dream for a few days and costs nothing... Unsure if this is more or less likely than winning powerball. |
#1529
|
|||
|
|||
I actually believe that part. I bet he's had an opinion in his files for years. I hope that his impatience links with the idea that justice delayed is justice denied and in the immortal words of Bruce Buffer, "IT'S TIME!' I HOPE that whoever writes it foresees all the other BS tricks that will be used to obstruct our rights and writes a very directive opinion that forecloses all or most of them.
__________________
I wish today's liberals could understand: You cannot be generous by giving away other peoples' money and you cannot demonstrate your virtue by your willingness to give up other peoples' rights. The more time I spend on this forum, the more sense kcbrown makes. |
#1530
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#1531
|
|||
|
|||
That’s not really how it works. The opinion Roberts would write must get at least 4 others to sign on to the opinion.
If Roberts were to vote with a pro-2nd Amendment 6-3 majority and write a weak opinion, the other 5 would write or join a much stronger majority opinion and Roberts’ opinion becomes a concurring opinion. |
#1532
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The system is designed so that the Justice authoring a majority opinion is not able to use the opportunity as a "Bully Pulpit."
__________________
If you build a man a fire, you'll keep him warm for the evening. If you set a man on fire, you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life. |
#1533
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Thanks for the explanation. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
NRA LifeTime Member |
#1534
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Even if the conservatives are in lock step, they will want to make sure each of their discrete and nuanced evaluations is represented. The liberals will lobby to soften and tailor the remarks and try to narrow the decision. Then they will spend a great deal of time writing the opposition statement to challenge every thesis posited in the majority opinion. This will take a while.
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.” "Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool." "The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first." |
#1535
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
There is a lot of "massaging" that goes into the writing of an opinion, both to integrate, and balance, the opinions of the majority, and to address the dissenting opinions. This one is probably gonna require more of that effort than most. Look for it to come out at the end of the term.
__________________
If you build a man a fire, you'll keep him warm for the evening. If you set a man on fire, you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life. |
#1536
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#1537
|
||||
|
||||
The Court isn’t going to prioritize its opinion releases based on future election dates. Arguably more volatile is the Texas abortion case.
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.” "Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool." "The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first." |
#1539
|
|||
|
|||
The decision was 9-0 so probably easy to write and get agreement.
__________________
I wish today's liberals could understand: You cannot be generous by giving away other peoples' money and you cannot demonstrate your virtue by your willingness to give up other peoples' rights. The more time I spend on this forum, the more sense kcbrown makes. |
#1540
|
|||
|
|||
That's why the big contested cases get decided last. They don't just write an opinion, they have to respond to those who didn't join in their opinion.
|
#1541
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I figured we could start "fresh", now that we've had some discussion on it, rather than merely continuing where we are here. Maybe the result will have greater clarity. Knowing how we both are, I suspect we'll both be posting walls of text, because that's how we both are, but it'll be fun regardless.
__________________
The Constitution is not "the Supreme Law of the Land, except in the face of contradicting law which has not yet been overturned by the courts". It is THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, PERIOD. You break your oath to uphold the Constitution if you don't refuse to enforce unadjudicated laws you believe are Unconstitutional. The real world laughs at optimism. And here's why. |
#1543
|
|||
|
|||
They did with this one...
Quote:
It looks like NY hasn't scheduled it's 2022 primary election yet. My bet would be that they release this decision the Monday after that election. Again, this is so that it doesn't become a last-minute disrupter of the election dynamic. https://ballotpedia.org/New_York_elections,_2022 However, that may not work during a redistricting year. In 2012, New York didn't finalize it's maps until March of 2012. The primary election was September 2012, with the general election in November. While contentious, I don't think this needs to be one that's saved until June. Sometimes they lump them all into June to get the controversial decisions out the door before going on summer vacation. I'm sure that they will wait until after January 1st however, so that NYC has a new mayor as does Seattle and some other important races. This is one they won't hand to the incumbents to mess with on their way out. |
#1544
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
DiaHero Foundation - helping people manage diabetes. Sending diabetes supplies to Ukraine now, any help is appreciated. DDR AK furniture and Norinco M14 parts kit: https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1756292 Last edited by nick; 12-04-2021 at 3:37 PM.. |
#1545
|
||||
|
||||
I was looking at SCOTUS’ calendar for June and in the last week there is only activity on Monday, the 27th. It’s a Non Argument Day, so it’s perfect for releasing opinions. But then I realized the same thing Dvrjon said: abortion is a far hotter topic than Bearing Arms. So while they still may release it on the 27th, I now doubt it. My guess is earlier in June, but I’d love to be surprised by an even earlier release.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/
__________________
240+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives. |
#1546
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#1547
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#1550
|
||||
|
||||
Really? So the entirety of the Heller opinion was read aloud? Wow.
I wonder if, as its being read (by the author of the opinion, I assume) they have moments like I did during an oral report....and hearing the actual words come out, think, oooh..maybe I should have worded that differently, made it more clear..... Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
__________________
No government deprives its citizens of rights without asserting that its actions are "reasonable" and "necessary" for high-sounding reasons such as "public safety." A right that can be regulated is no right at all, only a temporary privilege dependent upon the good will of the very government officials that such right is designed to constrain. |
#1552
|
|||
|
|||
It does not. The author of the majority (or controlling) opinion reads a brief summary of the facts, holding, and reasoning, but not the full opinion.
Relatively rarely, the author of a dissent will read his or her dissenting opinion in full. |
#1553
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#1554
|
|||
|
|||
iirc both heller and mcdonald decisions were released at the end of june.
it was torture then, the waiting - they do not seem to be in any hurry to let the hoi polloi enjoy inalienable rights imo
__________________
NRA Life Member |
#1555
|
|||
|
|||
I'm hoping Thomas gets to write it.
I'm also hoping the decision takes a more global results oriented approach, rather than a narrow process oriented approach. If all they do is say GC cannot be required, it will take about an hour and a half for CA, NY and others to find a dozen new ways to continue to infringe, just like states did over voting rights in the Jim Crow era. The only approach that will get us our rights in practice is some sort of global edict that says something like, "Any law, regulation, or procedure that interferes with the right of a non-felon to carry a firearm in public in some manner is unconstitutional."
__________________
I wish today's liberals could understand: You cannot be generous by giving away other peoples' money and you cannot demonstrate your virtue by your willingness to give up other peoples' rights. The more time I spend on this forum, the more sense kcbrown makes. |
#1556
|
||||
|
||||
I agree, it will make all those fireworks that much sweeter
|
#1557
|
||||
|
||||
The case is discussed with the head of the NYSRPA from ~15 to 35 min at
https://youtu.be/z1NxHO3HP0k
__________________
240+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives. |
#1558
|
|||
|
|||
|
#1559
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
I wish today's liberals could understand: You cannot be generous by giving away other peoples' money and you cannot demonstrate your virtue by your willingness to give up other peoples' rights. The more time I spend on this forum, the more sense kcbrown makes. |
#1560
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|