Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 43

Thread: 'Second Amendment drama: Act II', Lyle Denniston SCOTUSblog.com

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    http://www.scotusblog.com/2010/02/se...ii/#more-16704

    Does anyone know of a live coverage, text or audio, source.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    166

    Post imported post

    There is the second amendment foundation, www.saf.org.

  3. #3
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    Master Doug Huffman wrote:
    http://www.scotusblog.com/2010/02/se...ii/#more-16704

    Does anyone know of a live coverage, text or audio, source.
    If you mean of the oral arguments themselves, I don't believe there is any live coverage, or any electronic recording that is later released. The text transcript of the arguments will be published fairly soon after they are done. The SCOTUS blog site usually has links.

    It will be very interesting to read!

    TFred

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Provo, Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,076

    Post imported post

    TFred wrote:
    If you mean of the oral arguments themselves, I don't believe there is any live coverage, or any electronic recording that is later released. The text transcript of the arguments will be published fairly soon after they are done. The SCOTUS blog site usually has links.

    It will be very interesting to read!
    I don't remember where I got it, but the oral argument audio in the Heller case was released.

  5. #5
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    rpyne wrote:
    TFred wrote:
    If you mean of the oral arguments themselves, I don't believe there is any live coverage, or any electronic recording that is later released. The text transcript of the arguments will be published fairly soon after they are done. The SCOTUS blog site usually has links.

    It will be very interesting to read!
    I don't remember where I got it, but the oral argument audio in the Heller case was released.
    Oh, wow... I didn't know that!

    Even more wow... audio with transcript:

    http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/..._290/argument/

    TFred

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    Heller's SCOTUS oral arguments had realtime commentary by IIRC Gura & Possessky via CoverItLive. I've not heard a similar commitment for McDonald but here is CoverItLive's current index

    http://www.coveritlive.com/index.php...amp;Itemid=223

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Central, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    359

    Post imported post

    Scotusblog provided a liveblog of the audio as CSPAN aired the audio. CSPAN had the audio broadcast scheduled for shortly after the conclusion of oral arguments. Since this case is so important on so many levels, we might expect the same again this time.

    http://www.scotusblog.com/2008/03/th...ase-live-blog/

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    Thanks.

    If you will look at the scripts that (want to) run on that page then you will see "coveritlive.com".

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Central, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    359

    Post imported post

    SCOTUSblog is reporting this:
    The Supreme Court has refused a request by cable and other broadcast networks to release on Tuesday the audiotape of the Court’s hearing in the Second Amendment case, McDonald, et al., v. Chicago, et al. (08-1521). The refusal was conveyed to the networks by the Court, but no document was released on it. The Court has released promptly the audiotape on only one case during recent months — the Citizens United v. FEC case, heard in September before the current Term opened. Under current policy, the written transcript of Tuesday’s argument will be released later in the day. The argument is scheduled for one hour, starting at 10 a.m.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    Today at the Court
    McDonald v. Chicago argument
    Erin Miller | Tuesday, March 2nd, 2010 8:59 am The Court is expected to announce opinions at 10 a.m., which we will be live-blogging. Then the Court will hear argument in the gun rights case McDonald v. City of ChicagoHui v. Castaneda: and in
    ~10 a.m. – At issue in McDonald v. City of Chicago (08-1521) is whether the Second Amendment’s individual right to keep and bear arms should apply (or be “incorporated” against) to state and local governments, through either the Privileges or Immunities Clause or the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Lyle Denniston’s extensive background post on the case is here.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    Previously recorded mp3 podcasts up at SCOTUSblog

    Continuing our series of five-minute podcasts on oral argument days, we have two new podcasts below with counsel in McDonald v. City of Chicago (08-1521), in which the Court will consider whether the Second Amendment’s individual right to keep and bear arms should be incorporated against state and local government through either the Privileges or Immunities Clause or the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Because the approaches to incorporation are so different, and more than fifty amicus briefs were filed in the case, we are including five podcasts to capture the full scope of argument.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    661

    Post imported post

    For as much as people on this board criticize the NRA, it seems in this case they saved Gura's bacon. There was no way the court was going to incorporate under privileges and immunities. By going the due process route, the NRA's counsel gave SCOTUS their way to incorporation. In this case, the NRA was right on the money.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    NoVA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    431

    Post imported post

    Do we know that Gura would have refused to discuss the Due Process approach? I think, if pressed to, and w/o NRA's interference, he would have made a good case for Due Process incorporation.

    Regardless, the oral arguments were/are not needed (this is why Thomas never questions/comments during them). There is already a mountain of briefs on either side submitted in any case:
    http://www.chicagoguncase.com/case-f.../#SupremeCourt

    Still, Kudos to the NRA for the help, even if they were pretty heavy-handing in their efforts to contribute.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    Dahwg wrote:
    For as much as people on this board criticize the NRA, it seems in this case they saved Gura's bacon. There was no way the court was going to incorporate under privileges and immunities. By going the due process route, the NRA's counsel gave SCOTUS their way to incorporation. In this case, the NRA was right on the money.
    Master Doug Huffman wrote:
    I predict that the Second Amendment will be incorporated against the states through the 'privileges or immunities' clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as requested by Alan Gura and not via the 'due process' clause argued by the NRA.

    This SCOTUS is left leaning and the 'privilege or immunities' allows a more extreme expansion of civil rights into homosexuality and health care.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Virginiaplanter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    402

    Post imported post

    Dahwg wrote:
    For as much as people on this board criticize the NRA, it seems in this case they saved Gura's bacon.
    That's funny because I said to myself, "Thanks Clements, you just saved our bacon!" To which I just had to go get a bacon sandwich. MMMMMMMmmmmmmm...Bacon



  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    Let us not forget that not even the transcripts have been released, let alone the decision rendered.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    McDonald v. City of Chicago transcript

    http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_a...ts/08-1521.pdf 77 pages 342 kB

  18. #18
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818

    Post imported post

    Master Doug Huffman wrote:
    Let us not forget that not even the transcripts have been released, let alone the decision rendered.
    Master Doug Huffman wrote:
    I imagine that the transcript will appear first here
    http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_a...anscripts.html
    It says in the link that they should be released same day.... so hopefully tomorrow some of us will have had a chance to read through them in full. I enjoy reading them but get P.O'd at all the partisan rhetoric and thinly veiled contempt the justices show for one another. They're like a bunch of school children........ Ah well.




    ETA: Darn it! I'm a day late and a dollar short with everything today!
    Thanks for the link to the transcript Doug.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    Master Doug Huffman wrote:
    Let us not forget that not even the transcripts have been released, let alone the decision rendered.
    No, Doug, both have.

    :quirky

  20. #20
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    Looks to me from what I have been hearing about the arguments and the reactions of the Justices that "incorporation" will be a given, but then we will be thrown into the muddy bullcrap of "reasonable" restrictions. Leaving years of squabbling (and arrests and cases and decisions) before it gets ironed out exactly what the 2A means, or rather means in the World According to SCOTUS.

    "Hard cases make bad law". Yep, and the antis are struggling very diligently to make this caxe as hard as possible. We may slay the dragon only to have a colony of fire ants emerge from its corpse.

    Oh well. Cows may come and cows may go, but the bull goes on forever.

  21. #21
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818

    Post imported post

    Just got done reading the oral arguments....

    Chicago's attorney was backpedaling the whole way. It's pretty hard to defend an indefensible position. Not only that, his assertion that there is a right to self defense (which would possibly be an unenumerated right guaranteed by the P&I clause of the 14th) almost makes him sound like he's arguing for incorporation.

    Besides Breyer; who's a complete D-Bag, the liberal justices seem more intrigued by incorporation than against it. I think they will think a lot about what they can get out of this. I still doubt they'll go for incorporation through P&I though. If history has taught us anything it's that the liberals usually want more civil rights, but not at the expense of their own power.

    I believe Alan Gura did a fine job when compared to Feldman And that the NRA and Mr. Clement in no way saved his butt or needed to. Especially since the only time he was having a hard time was when he was being asked dumb questions by; who else, Breyer.

    Alexcabbie;
    Unfortunately, that's what we are faced with. It's better than the alternative. But; the reasonable restrictions stuff was touched on in the oral arguments only inasmuch as it applied to Heller. Of course Mr Feldmen...ehem...esquire.... tried to say that it was reasonable for Chicago to ban handguns. Evidently, the Heller decision is what he is worried about being applied to the states.... thinking that banning handguns should be reasonable. If you haven't read the arguments give 'em a browse.





    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    Brass Magnet wrote:
    Chicago's attorney was backpedaling the whole way. It's pretty hard to defend an indefensible position.
    Not just backpedaling but lecturing the Justices, talking back as it were. But I'm still reading.

    Isn't that militia purpose just as much defeated by allowing the States to take away the militia's arms as it would be by allowing the Federal Government to take away the militia's arms?
    MR. FELDMAN: Yes, but I -- that -
    JUSTICE SCALIA: Then so -
    MR. FELDMAN: But that -
    JUSTICE SCALIA: -- even if you assume that the whole thing turns around the militia prologue, that prologue is just as -- just as important with respect to the State's depriving the people of arms.
    Maybe the 'militia' clause is dead. I haven't seen the stake but only the hammer.
    MR. FELDMAN: But I don't think the argument -- the primary argument that is being made today, that this is implicit in the concept of ordered liberty or sufficiently fundamental or whichever other formulas -
    JUSTICE SCALIA: You are switching horses now.
    MR. FELDMAN: No, I'm not.

  23. #23

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128

    Post imported post

    Interesting how much time was spent with the question of whetherthe 2nd was fully incorporated by the 14th Amend. Due Process clause, or only partially incorporated.

    Partial incorporation is bad news.

    Let us hope this is not the way the Court decides to put teeth in the TenthAmendment.

  24. #24
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    Yeah, well it is pathetic how a pack of lawyers have managed over a couple centuries to turn the greatest charter in the history of the planet into a dog's breakfast of rulings, precedent, and interpretation. It is as if they had taken something as simple and elegant as the Colt SAA and attached so many ornaments and geegaws to it as to all but obliterate its original purpose and utility. By the time they got finished, each chamber would hold a different cartridge and a certified gunsmith would have to change barrels for each shot; and I don't even wanna think about what they would have done to the lockwork. And then they would point to the backstrap and call it an "original" SAA. Jeeze Louise.....

  25. #25
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818

    Post imported post

    The Donkey wrote:
    Interesting how much time was spent with the question of whetherthe 2nd was fully incorporated by the 14th Amend. Due Process clause, or only partially incorporated.

    Partial incorporation is bad news.

    Let us hope this is not the way the Court decides to put teeth in the TenthAmendment.
    I don't think that argument was seriously considered from what I've read, especially since fe-fe-fe-fe-fe-feldman was making it. I think that whole line of questioning was a direct result of his backpedaling.


    Alexcabbie wrote:
    It is as if they had taken something as simple and elegant as the Colt SAA and attached so many ornaments and geegaws to it as to all but obliterate its original purpose and utility.
    You mean, like people keep doing to their AR-15's?
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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