OPS MARINE
Regular Member
imported post
I know this is long, but this is a conversation I watched this morning on CNN between Tony Harris, an anchor and Jeffrey Toobin, Legal Analyst for CNN:
Tony asked a question about activists on the Supreme Court, and following is the conversation sparked by that question.
Jeffrey: "Activists is one of those epithets that is thrown around when it comes to Supreme Court Justices. But, as it turns out, everybody likes a certain kind of activist. Liberals like Roe v Wade which was a decision to overturn abortion laws in many states in the Union. That is certainly an activist decision. But Conservatives like activism, too. They like the Heller decision two years ago that overturned GUN CONTROL LAWS. Democratically passed, democratically elected officials passed gun control laws in Supreme Court struck down decisions turned that down. The Supreme Court struck down part of the McCain/Feingold law. That was certainly an activist decision...so there are Liberal activists and Conservative activists. I think that term should be retired because it's not helpful but i don't have high hops for it being so."
Tony: "Real quick, Jeffrey, thre was a decision pending soon, uh, McDonald v Chicago, a case examining the legality of Chicago's handgun ban. Why don't you set up what's at issue there and I know you've got some thoughts on the difficulty the COurt is going to have in squaring the decision that came down in the D.C. case."
Jeffrey: "Correct. In the Heller case two years ago, that was the case that said the District of Columbia, which is considered part of the Federal Government, may not ban handguns under the Second Amendment which speaks of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. The question in the case you mentioned is wheteher the State of Illinois can ban handguns because the Bill of Rights speaks directly to the Federal Government. The Amendments say Congress shall pass no law, shall make no law...but over a series of decisions the Justices have applied many, not all...many of the provisions of Bill of Rights against the State.
The question is, may states as well as the Federal Government be restricted in passing gun control laws, and given the oral arguments, given the way the Courts are going, I think the answer will be YES...States will be banned from making gun control laws but it's one of the many contentious issues the new Justice will face..."
I know this is long, but this is a conversation I watched this morning on CNN between Tony Harris, an anchor and Jeffrey Toobin, Legal Analyst for CNN:
Tony asked a question about activists on the Supreme Court, and following is the conversation sparked by that question.
Jeffrey: "Activists is one of those epithets that is thrown around when it comes to Supreme Court Justices. But, as it turns out, everybody likes a certain kind of activist. Liberals like Roe v Wade which was a decision to overturn abortion laws in many states in the Union. That is certainly an activist decision. But Conservatives like activism, too. They like the Heller decision two years ago that overturned GUN CONTROL LAWS. Democratically passed, democratically elected officials passed gun control laws in Supreme Court struck down decisions turned that down. The Supreme Court struck down part of the McCain/Feingold law. That was certainly an activist decision...so there are Liberal activists and Conservative activists. I think that term should be retired because it's not helpful but i don't have high hops for it being so."
Tony: "Real quick, Jeffrey, thre was a decision pending soon, uh, McDonald v Chicago, a case examining the legality of Chicago's handgun ban. Why don't you set up what's at issue there and I know you've got some thoughts on the difficulty the COurt is going to have in squaring the decision that came down in the D.C. case."
Jeffrey: "Correct. In the Heller case two years ago, that was the case that said the District of Columbia, which is considered part of the Federal Government, may not ban handguns under the Second Amendment which speaks of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. The question in the case you mentioned is wheteher the State of Illinois can ban handguns because the Bill of Rights speaks directly to the Federal Government. The Amendments say Congress shall pass no law, shall make no law...but over a series of decisions the Justices have applied many, not all...many of the provisions of Bill of Rights against the State.
The question is, may states as well as the Federal Government be restricted in passing gun control laws, and given the oral arguments, given the way the Courts are going, I think the answer will be YES...States will be banned from making gun control laws but it's one of the many contentious issues the new Justice will face..."
