Comments on: Supreme Court Punts on D.C. Gun Ban

By: Myspace Graphics and Backgrounds, Myspace Stuff

Myspace Graphics and Backgrounds, Myspace Stuff — Mon, 26 Nov 2007 01:00:09 +0000

Myspace Graphics and Backgrounds, Myspace Stuff...

Sorry, it just sounds like a crazy idea for me :)...

By: Dodd

Dodd — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 20:42:48 +0000

The SupCt passed on Emerson, which represented the first clearcut victory for the individual rights view in a long, long time. Parker is really just the second such victory. When a shift like this begins in the Circuits, the Court often leaves things lie for a time to see if/how other Circuits respond. I wouldn't be surprised if they leave this one be, as well, and wait for another - possibly even one that goes the other way, thereby establishing the the Circuit split isn't going to correct itself - before stepping in. We need to get a case like this one up to the Ninth.

By: Paul

Paul — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 20:43:27 +0000

The Court hasn't "declined" to do anything. It simply hasn't announced yet whether it will take the case. Nor will the Court do "nothing." The Court will grant certiorari or it will deny certiorari. But in either event, the Court will inform us of its decision. Hold your horses.

By: Tano

Tano — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 20:26:50 +0000

"doing nothing is a victory for friends of the 2nd Amendment"

We are all friends of the 2nd Amendment, especially those who take seriously all of its words, instead of just some.

By: McGehee

McGehee — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 17:30:51 +0000

I'm not surprised. Conflict among circuits has generally been an impetus for the Supreme Court to take action, but the Second Amendment has been one conspicuous exception.

I was predicting they'd punt long before people started rationalizing that a punt would be a good thing for gun rights. And I think the rationalization is pathetic.