Heller Decided

Money Quote:

The [2nd] Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but
does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative
clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it
connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms.

I guess this means Mr. Gross’s weapons violation can be thrown out and or expunged.

12 comments

  1. GAR says:

    Good news but a split decision 5-4 isn’t that great. Hopefully we get some more conservative justices soon.

  2. debbie0040 says:

    Kennedy voted right for a change.

    How many other cities will this ruling effect?

    The Supreme Court matters and is one huge reason to vote for McCain…

  3. Doug Deal says:

    I posted this to jason pye’s blog, but I will pull a SpaceyG and cross post here.

    This 5-4 decision is precisely why I cannot support someone like Barr or any other Libertarian for the office of President, but may be able to support them locally.

    The Supreme Court is really what everything is about. The left has played too many games with their appointments and the 4 clowns who vote in lock-step in seemingly every decision would do permanent damage to our Constitution, the one thing anyone who truly cares about our country should defend.

    The choice is simply and is in crystal clear focus. Elect Obama with a super friendly nearly fillibuster-proof Senate, and the left will get to replace these aging oligarchs with newer, younger and more extreme justices. With this choice, I fear that one day we will long for the days when “stalwart conservatives” like Stephens and Souter were on the court.

    With McCain, the left will have to wait out another 4 years before their justices retire for only a chance of getting an easy replacement. He may not appoint the Alitos, Scalias, Thomases and Robertses of the court, but he certainly won’t appoint the Stephenses, Souters, Ginsbergs or Breyers. Think of a Kennedy replacing a Stephens as a half win.

    Plus Scalia isn’t immortal, what if he suffers health problems in the next 4 years? Sure, let’s turn these 5-4 wins into 4-5 losses and 5-4 losses into a strong 6-3 loss.

    Vote Barr at your peril, but it would at least give the LP more to complain about, which is the one thing at which they are the most adept.

  4. Taft Republican says:

    Actually, I think “Souters” are exactly who McCain will appoint, along with “O’Connors”. Then he’ll have no trouble with McCain/Feingold etc. If McCain were a Republican, we might could expect better.

  5. Bill Simon says:

    Since you took his namesake, why don’t you educate us unwashed masses as to the laws that Judge Taft ruled on, TR, in his time on the USSC?

  6. Chris says:

    I do believe Taft Republican is a reference to the 1952 candidate for the GOP nomination, relative of, but not actually President Taft.

    I don’t recall, how did Gov. Taft disgrace himself?

  7. Tinkerhell says:

    This has minimal direct impact for Georgians but I can’t wait to see the cases that end up going to court becuase the “individual” question is now settled.

    I agree with the above regarding Barr/McCain. While I don’t trust McCain to put who I would like to see on the SCOTUS, I 100% trust Obama to put those I DON’T want to see on the Court. I’ll take the chance that McCain will at least put a neutral judge up there.

  8. Doug Deal says:

    Chris,

    Taft (and his cronies) is the reason why the Republicans lost a number of seats in Ohio as well as the Governorship.

    He was a corrupt Republican, through and through and should have been bounced a long time ago by the party people who just seem to care whether they hold power.

    Here is a line from wikipedia that sums it up:

    In the wake of convictions for the ethics violations (see criminal conviction section below), Taft’s approval rating bottomed out at 6.5 percent

    The Taft name is now mud in Ohio, thanks to junior.

Comments are closed.