DC appeals Parker case to SCOTUS

This is a discussion on DC appeals Parker case to SCOTUS within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; It would refreshing to see the SCOTUS go back and read the papers written by the framers to put the 2A in the proper context ...

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 48

Thread: DC appeals Parker case to SCOTUS

  1. #16
    VIP Member Array SIGguy229's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Kommie-fornia-stan
    Posts
    7,075
    It would refreshing to see the SCOTUS go back and read the papers written by the framers to put the 2A in the proper context it was intended--an individual right...and reaffirm the whole "shall not be infringed" part.

    When it comes to stuff like this--I worry politics will weigh heavy. After all, suppose a ruling in favor of the "proper" reading of the 2A (i.e. individual right) by SCOTUS now might lead to an "alternative" interpretation later by a crazy anti-gun judge nominated and confirmed by a crazy anti-gun President (think Prez Hellery and Justice Feinstein)

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    VIP Member
    Array dr_cmg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    10,808
    If the arguments DC makes are the ones shown here:
    In an earlier filling in the D.C. Circuit, city officials said their appeal to the Supreme Court would present some variation of these questions: "(1) whether the panel majority's decision conflicts with the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939), as Judge [Karen LeCraft] Henderson concluded in dissenting from the panel majority's decision; (2) whether the Second Amendment protects firearms possession or use that is not associated with service in a State militia; (3) whether the Amendment applies differently to the District because of its constitutional status, as Judge Henderson also concluded; and (4) whether the challenged laws represent reasonable regulation of whatever rights the Amendment protects." The city noted that the panel had acknowledged that its ruling conflicts with decisions "of most other federal courts of appeals, many State courts, and the highest local court in this jurisdiction, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals."
    I don't think they have a chance. SCOTUS will either refuse to hear which is good, or uphold the ruling which is better. Judge Silberman anticipated the very arguments that Judge Henderson made in her decenting opinion and brought in everything from the writings of the founding fathers to Supreme Court decisions in demolishing those arguments. If you haven't read Judge Silberman's opinion you can see it here. Masterful is the best word I can think of to describe it.
    George

    Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. Albert Einstein

  4. #18
    Senior Moderator
    Array pgrass101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    13,486
    George,

    I hope your right.
    “You can sway a thousand men by appealing to their prejudices quicker than you can convince one man by logic.”

    ― Robert A. Heinlein,

  5. #19
    Distinguished Member Array SixBravo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Prescott, AZ
    Posts
    1,692
    I, too, am concerned about this. I think the first post said it best... "Game On!" If SCOTUS comes down on the side of DC some of us in the bluer states may be in for a tough time in the coming years.

    However, from everything I've read, this is one of the best chances our side has to ever face-down the issue. Not all of the judges are on our side, but I believe it might be now or never. I would prefer never, but its a little late for that.

    How long do they have before they render a decision once the case is made?
    The Gunsite Blog
    ITFT / Quick Kill Review
    "It is enough to note, as we have observed, that the American people have considered the handgun to be the quintessential self-defense weapon." - Justice Scalia, SCOTUS - DC v Heller - 26 JUN 2008

  6. #20
    Member Array vernonator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    347
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob The Great View Post
    I don't know why people are afraid of this. I won't say that I'm certain of the outcome, but this is exactly what SCOTUS is supposed to do: settle disputes in interpretation of the constitution.

    IMO, the judges currently on the bench are the best chance we're going to get of getting an honest, correct, and "un-spun" interpretation of the 2A. I'm not going to predict a ruling, but if we (as gun owners) are sure we're in the right, then why be scared of clarification?

    It's the anti's trying to duck and weave and say that the 2A means something other than what it says. They should be afraid of authoritative clarification, and honestly, I'm a little surprised that they are pushing this. We don't have to put a spin on anything, because we're not trying to change the meaning of the amendment. Clarification is a good thing for us, so long as it's done with intellectual honesty. And right now seems to be the best opportunity to do it.
    Tell that to the folks that brought the Emminent Domain case up last year? Remember that? There is no telling how the court will land, but as others have said if they take the case this will be one of the most important 2A decisions in the last 100 yrs.

  7. #21
    Senior Member Array Musketeer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    701
    Quote Originally Posted by vernonator View Post
    Tell that to the folks that brought the Emminent Domain case up last year? Remember that? There is no telling how the court will land, but as others have said if they take the case this will be one of the most important 2A decisions in the last 100 yrs.
    BINGO!

    COTUS, basic English language and grammer and framer's intent mean absolutely NOTHING if the justices do not think it doe s9or have their own agenda).

    We THINK Alito and Roberts are on our side. We also thought Bush was a Conservative... For all we know they BELIEVE that it is more important for the legislature and governement to have control over arms and will therefore officially agree to pull the teeth of the 2A once and for all. Bush IS big government/big brother and these two appointees are his.

    The fact that those nine justices are ENTIRELY unnacountable for any decision they make means they have reached judicial paradise. Whatever they say is LAW. No appeal. They can decide what THEY want for the society THEY envision... The whole structure of the SCOTUS is a wreck and many founding fathers realized quickly the monster they had created.

    I am hopefull, but very very worried. There is nothing to keep them from saying the 2A is a state right and people have NO right to arms, period. If that happens what do we do?

    I think there are too many variables and unkowns on the court to have pushed this now. If we win I will be very happy but I do not think the large potential for a devastating loss is worth the gamble with the deck uncertainly stacked.

  8. #22
    Member Array Protect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tulsa, OK
    Posts
    302
    Quote Originally Posted by vernonator View Post
    Tell that to the folks that brought the Emminent Domain case up last year? Remember that? There is no telling how the court will land, but as others have said if they take the case this will be one of the most important 2A decisions in the last 100 yrs.
    Didn't they decline to hear the eminent domain case and let the state ruling stand? I thought they did or at least ruled that it was up to each state.
    "When a man attempts to deal with me by force, I answer him—by force.
    "... No, I do not share his evil or sink to his concept of morality: I merely grant him his choice, destruction, the only destruction he had the right to choose: his own." -John Galt, Atlas Shrugged

  9. #23
    VIP Member Array Rob99VMI04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    NOVA...200 square miles surrounded by reality
    Posts
    3,242
    Any way it goes its going to be VERY INTERESTING times ahead. As Optimus says "One will FALL and oen will Stand"
    “Are you a thermometer or a thermostat, do you reflect or become what is happening in the room or do you change the atmosphere, reset the temperature when you come into the room”?--Chuck Swindoll

    Its not about guns...Its about Freedom!

  10. #24
    Member Array firefighter_56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Walton, OR
    Posts
    115
    This is more than about guns, this is about upholding the Constitution, the stakes are high, this is an important crossroad in our rights as a free people.

  11. #25
    VIP Member
    Array dr_cmg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    10,808
    Quote Originally Posted by vernonator View Post
    Tell that to the folks that brought the Emminent Domain case up last year? Remember that? There is no telling how the court will land, but as others have said if they take the case this will be one of the most important 2A decisions in the last 100 yrs.
    Kelo v. City of New London was in 2005. There is a different court in place now. Kelo also focused a whole lot of unwanted attention on the SCOTUS and the current members don't want that to happen again. The decision will be better worded and better rendered than the Kelo decision no matter which way it goes.
    George

    Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. Albert Einstein

  12. #26
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    44,695

    Dr...

    Quote Originally Posted by dr_cmg View Post
    If the arguments DC makes are the ones shown here:

    I don't think they have a chance. SCOTUS will either refuse to hear which is good, or uphold the ruling which is better. Judge Silberman anticipated the very arguments that Judge Henderson made in her decenting opinion and brought in everything from the writings of the founding fathers to Supreme Court decisions in demolishing those arguments. If you haven't read Judge Silberman's opinion you can see it here. Masterful is the best word I can think of to describe it.
    Good read...I am continually amazed how each attorney can play with the English language...

    I also, think the time is certainly better now...than later!

    "Let's Roll..."

    Stay armed...stay safe!

    ret
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  13. #27
    VIP Member
    Array dr_cmg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    10,808
    Quote Originally Posted by Protect View Post
    Didn't they decline to hear the eminent domain case and let the state ruling stand? I thought they did or at least ruled that it was up to each state.
    No, by 5-4 majority rule they ruled to affirm the Connecticut Supreme Court's ruling in Kelo v. City of New London. Since then 8 states passed constitutional amendments to prohibit the use of eminent domain for economic development.
    George

    Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. Albert Einstein

  14. #28
    Distinguished Member Array randytulsa2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    1,548
    This is some serious stuff here, friends.

    On the one hand, I don't see how we can lose given the current composition of the court. We won't ever have a better chance for a righteous decision than we have with the justices we have sitting up there right now.

    OTOH, it's a whole different ballgame from the armchair quarterbacking I've been doing here. Once they decide to take it, the roller coaster ride begins.

    They could refuse to take it, but I wouldn't count on it. I bet they will. I also bet they'll hand down a good decision for us, but I'll be doggoned if I know exactly what that decision will look like.

    Tense, tense, times, 'cause they could also give us some ridiculous, weasely illogic in the decision. You just never know.

    We better hope that Scalia or Thomas writes the opinion.

    If they don't, we better hope for a fun-to-read concurrence from them.

    Worst-case scenario is a fun-to-read dissent written by one and joined by the other.
    "...bad decisions that turn out well often make heroes."


    Gary D. Mitchell, A Sniper's Journey: The Truth About the Man and the Rifle, P. 103, NAL Caliber books, 2006, 1st Ed.

  15. #29
    VIP Member Array obxned's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    OBX, NC
    Posts
    2,655
    Either way, we will know where we stand!
    "If we loose Freedom here, there's no place to escape to. This is the Last Place on Earth!" Ronald Reagan

  16. #30
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,967
    I don't have the history of the court memorized or at hand, but I will say these are definitely interesting times! As I recall, historically the court found ways to avoid directly ruling on state right vs individual right several times. As I see it they have a couple of easy ways out if they so choose. They can simply refuse the case and let the lower court's ruling stand. This as I understand it would really have minimal impact outside that circuit. Lawyers could cite it in support of their arguments, but the other circuits would not be obliged to follow it. Or, they could rule that since only one of the original complainants had standing, and was a resident of D.C. which is not a state, there can not be a state militia for him to join, so the ban is legal. That would mean nothing to those of us that live outside of D.C. because we could all in theory join our state's militia in time of need. If they did that it would still leave the state right versus individual right open for interpretation. Or as was said before, they could rule that D.C. is simply a federal reservation, like a military base and thereby prohibit all private ownership of weapons in the city, but still leaving the big questions unanswered for the rest of the country.
    If the court gives us any of these half rulings, like they have traditionally done, we might still be making the same arguments in front of Justice Feinstein and Justice Schumer ten years from now.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

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

Similar Threads

  1. THE MAN BEHIND PARKER-HELLER Vs. DC AT SCOTUS
    By cagueits in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 6th, 2007, 08:11 PM
  2. Woohoo!!! SCOTUS Take the Case.
    By CT-Mike in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 20th, 2007, 04:12 PM
  3. Another Case For The SCOTUS?
    By ronwill in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: November 16th, 2007, 08:44 PM
  4. Well, they did it... DC Asks SCOTUS to take Parker
    By Bob The Great in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: September 8th, 2007, 12:58 PM
  5. Appeals court refuses to rehear Parker!
    By Blackeagle in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: May 9th, 2007, 04:28 PM