Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: 2 Questions.....

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    1. When is the Supreme Court expected to give a ruling re. McDonald v Chicago 2. Shouldn't the 2A apply to everyone who is legally in the U.S. ?

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    The decision will be before the end of the term in October.

    To whom "constitutional rights" apply is a knotty question. Human rights are inherent to humanity.

  3. #3
    Regular Member rodbender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Navasota, Texas, USA
    Posts
    2,524

    Post imported post

    IIRC, some time in June or July. Expected, not guaranteed.
    The thing about common sense is....it ain't too common.
    Will Rogers

  4. #4
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358

    Post imported post

    And of course, even if McDonald gets ruled in our favor, the fact remains that States like Maryland have it as an official matter of policy and State Supreme Court case law that the 2A does not apply.

    A SCOTUS ruling would make for a REALLY strong case to get states like MD to bring their own laws in line with the US Constitution. But it's still going to take "test cases" in MD (and other anti places like NY, NJ, and DC) to get those locales to revise their statutes, case law, and policies.

    And as we've seen in DC with Heller, even THEN, it's no guarantee that the state/local governments will abide by SCOTUS rulings. DC's current policy and procedures for handgun ownership are so onerous as to be verging on contempt of court under the Heller ruling...

    I have great confidence that the McDonald case will rule in our favor.

    I also believe that it will precipitate an avalanche of "test cases" in MD, NY, NJ, HI and DC, in an attempt to bring ALL the states in-line with the US Constitution.

    It's going to be a long battle. And quite frankly, I don't see legal carry or reciprocity for average citizens in MD (even those with permits from other states) or Shall Issue in MD anytime within the next 2 years. And that would be in a "best case scenario".

    Keep your fingers crossed, folks. We're getting VERY close to ""leveling the playing field" with regards to nation-wide 2A incorporation, and nation-wide standardization of carry laws, but these last holdout enclaves are going to be tedious cases, and are going to be filled with all sorts of hyperbolic propaganda from the anti's.

    Get the popcorn ready folks...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  5. #5
    Regular Member shad0wfax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,067

    Post imported post

    Dreamer wrote:
    [snip]

    And as we've seen in DC with Heller, even THEN, it's no guarantee that the state/local governments will abide by SCOTUS rulings. DC's current policy and procedures for handgun ownership are so onerous as to be verging on contempt of court under the Heller ruling...

    I have great confidence that the McDonald case will rule in our favor.[snip]
    The real issue is whether we win under privileges and immunities (Slaughterhouse is overturned) or if we win under due process.

    If we win under privileges and immunities via Slaughterhouse being overturned (not likely at all, in my opinion) then we win a major victory and have far less to worry about from the states. Although as you said it will most likely require cases in each state to force the repeal of specific laws or statutes before we have a true 2nd amendment again.

    If we win under due process (fairly likely, in my opinion) then we will face the same thing in each state with laws we don't like that the residents of D.C. are facing. Due process simply means the states have to give us a process by which we can accomplish whatever it is we're trying to do. Concealed-Carry permits in California are a prime example of due process gone wrong; it's very difficult to get a CA CCW and they can be quite restrictive as to where they apply. Some Sheriffs simply refuse to issue them at all. However, because they can issue them and there is an application process to do so, you have due process.

    Free states will remain free and states like California will require constant legal battles for every bit of legal minutiae to restore freedoms.

    I'm not trying to downplay McDonald but as you implied we will still face an uphill battle in many cities and states even if we win.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Utah, USA
    Posts
    184

    Post imported post

    So I think that DC vs Heller was 5-4 in finding against the ban. Was'nt this before Justice Sotomayor, I don't know enough about her. Does anyone know or can you divinate how she might find in the Mc Donald case.

    Defensor

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    1,140

    Post imported post

    Ummm??? If SCOTUS rules that 2A applies to the States, and that the right to bear arms is for individuals, the States will be required to follow this.

    If you mean that it will then require people to challenge the existing laws based on this ruling, perhaps. Luckily in every jurisdiction there are thousands of illegal gun cases that will immediately challenge this and everyone who has been busted without a "gun license" or similar, will immediately turn to the SCOTUS ruling. Expect that within a year you will see numerous federal appeal court cases.

    More than likely many laws will be immediately written off the books at the instruction of State AGs.

    Dreamer wrote:
    And of course, even if McDonald gets ruled in our favor, the fact remains that States like Maryland have it as an official matter of policy and State Supreme Court case law that the 2A does not apply.

    A SCOTUS ruling would make for a REALLY strong case to get states like MD to bring their own laws in line with the US Constitution. But it's still going to take "test cases" in MD (and other anti places like NY, NJ, and DC) to get those locales to revise their statutes, case law, and policies.


  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    1,140

    Post imported post

    Also, there is a CONSERVATIVE principle herein in federalism that could happen. The courts could rule very well that 2A prohibits the US Federal Government from infringing on the rights of the States decisions to regulate guns for the Militia. In order word, there is a possibility that the Conservative judges (based on previous opinions) could say that 2A applies to the Citizens ability to bear arms, but does not prohibit the State government the right to decide which arms they can bear.

    Many of the conservative judges on SCOTUS are State-Rights advocates. Remember, it was SCOTUS that ruled a few years back that homemade guns can not be regulated by the federal government.

    Be prepared that the conservatives in the court will rule this way, and there is president for them to rule this way. Two of the top conservatives in the courts, Frank Easterbrook and Richard Posner both support this point of view!

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    OK.....so what about the 2A applying to everyone who is legally in the U.S. ? And not just those who are citizens or have an immigrant visa.

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran Bookman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Winston Salem, North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    1,424

    Post imported post

    DEFENSOR wrote:
    So I think that DC vs Heller was 5-4 in finding against the ban. Was'nt this before Justice Sotomayor, I don't know enough about her. Does anyone know or can you divinate how she might find in the Mc Donald case.

    Defensor
    Believe it or not Sotomayor isn't really a factor in this decision. She replaced one of the justices who voted against Heller so the numbers don't change just because of her presence on the USSC. What we have to be wary of is one of the 5 who voted in favor of Heller deciding that the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to the states.

    I personally think it will be a close decision, and if we win this case it will still be by a 5t-4 decision.
    "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke


    "I like people who stand on the Constitution... unless they're using it to wipe their feet." - Jon E Hutcherson

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Utah, USA
    Posts
    184

    Post imported post

    Bookman wrote:
    DEFENSOR wrote:
    So I think that DC vs Heller was 5-4 in finding against the ban. Was'nt this before Justice Sotomayor, I don't know enough about her. Does anyone know or can you divinate how she might find in the Mc Donald case.

    Defensor
    Believe it or not Sotomayor isn't really a factor in this decision. She replaced one of the justices who voted against Heller so the numbers don't change just because of her presence on the USSC. What we have to be wary of is one of the 5 who voted in favor of Heller deciding that the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to the states.

    I personally think it will be a close decision, and if we win this case it will still be by a 5t-4 decision.
    That sounds verylogical, I think that we need every common sense decision we can get so Ireally hope that this is one of them.

    Thanks for your input, much appreciated Defensor out


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •