Antonin Scalia says gun control is heading to Supreme Court

[bmelton]

Pretty decent article, if entirely too short, but basically, Scalia knows that gun control is heading uphill to SCOTUS, and he's been softening up his liberal colleagues.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2521413

 

[AliasNeo07]

Hope its sooner rather than later.

Wonder why no cases made it to scotus during the 94 AWB

 

[Kingjamez]

Hope its sooner rather than later.

Wonder why no cases made it to scotus during the 94 AWB

Because we didn't have the internets.

-jim

 

[6-Pack]

Hope its sooner rather than later.

Wonder why no cases made it to scotus during the 94 AWB

Two reasons: 1) the right to bear arms wasn't defined as an individual right (Heller) and 2) the Second Amendment wasn't made applicable to the states (McDonald).

 

[X-Factor]

I do love Scalia....even when I disagree with him I truly enjoy hearing him speak.

 

[teratos]

My biggest concern is something happening to one of "The Five". Then we will have an Obama appointee to contend with.....

 

[gamer_jim]

Aren't 2 of the justices scheduled to retire real soon?

 

[flintstone]

Aren't 2 of the justices scheduled to retire real soon?

Probably Ginsburg and also Breyer, both are liberal. Obama will appoint 2 younger left winged justices that will be on the court for 30 years or more.

 

[HollowPoint]

How many lives will be destroyed and how much money will be made before these cases reach scotus?

Rhetorical!

 

[AliasNeo07]

Interesting about Keagan hunting with Scalia...

 

[Brooklyn]

Don't forget that the game in the senate is on. Our job is to make gun rights as radioactive on the bench as roe v wade..
It can be done but its needs money..

Also we send message to senate other than passing awb putting anti 2a on bench is also career ending..
I assume that is in play now.. this NRA home court..

And its not just 2a. No living constitution; our laws are enough of a poltergeist as it is.

We rule 5 without mercy the living constitution idea.

We have to win.
Its far more than 2a now....

There is no other acceptable alternative.

 

[hooligan82]

I do love Scalia....even when I disagree with him I truly enjoy hearing him speak.

You hit the nail on the head. He breaks down the importance of SCOTUS appointments and differing SCOTUS views in this interview.

 

[Bob A]

Speaking at the Federalist Society, Scalia mentioned that the office of President was not as important as people thought. He seemed to see it as more of a figurehead, symbolic kind of thing. (Maybe he was contrasting it, in his own mind, with a lifetime SCT appointment. But I don't know).

 

[rambling_one]

How many lives will be destroyed and how much money will be made before these cases reach scotus?

Rhetorical!

There is a point to made here though. Too many citizens suffer when an unconstitutional law is allowed to stand while awaiting an undetermined time table for rectification by the courts.

 

[teratos]

Speaking at the Federalist Society, Scalia mentioned that the office of President was not as important as people thought. He seemed to see it as more of a figurehead, symbolic kind of thing. (Maybe he was contrasting it, in his own mind, with a lifetime SCT appointment. But I don't know).

There are supposed to be 3 co-equal branches of government. In recent times we put a lot of emphasis on the President. It wasn't meant to be that way. I bet most people can't name a single Supreme Court Justice.

 

[bmelton]

Speaking at the Federalist Society, Scalia mentioned that the office of President was not as important as people thought. He seemed to see it as more of a figurehead, symbolic kind of thing. (Maybe he was contrasting it, in his own mind, with a lifetime SCT appointment. But I don't know).

It's a fair point Constitutionally, but the last few presidents we've had have all been fairly power-grabbing, and have been passing legislation by executive order, etc.

The Supreme Court Justices, as a whole, are the far more 'powerful' unit, as they are effectively the highest office they can be appointed to (no upward mobility), and are not necessarily beholden to anyone's interests, but that power is generally balanced by there being 9 of them, so no single Justice can just get their way.

Also, the work of SCOTUS is reactive, while the work of the president is proactive. Congress and the president make the laws, while SCOTUS makes sure that said laws are Constitutionally valid. That said, it takes a lawsuit making it up to SCOTUS for them to be able to do anything about it.

It truly is a marvelous system we have, when it works.

 

[EL1227]

+1,000

Don't forget that the game in the senate is on. Our job is to make gun rights as radioactive on the bench as roe v wade..
It can be done but its needs money..

Also we send message to senate other than passing awb putting anti 2a on bench is also career ending..
I assume that is in play now.. this NRA home court..

And its not just 2a. No living constitution; our laws are enough of a poltergeist as it is.

We rule 5 without mercy the living constitution idea.

We have to win.
Its far more than 2a now....

There is no other acceptable alternative.

2A is the last vestige of hope left in the Bill of Rights. If that fails, all else will
fall to tyranny.

WAKE UP AMERICA !!!

 

[Crab Bait]

There are supposed to be 3 co-equal branches of government. In recent times we put a lot of emphasis on the President. It wasn't meant to be that way. I bet most people can't name a single Supreme Court Justice.

As soon as I saw this I said something to my wife about Scalia... and she said "Who?"

I teach social studies and she teaches math, so I said, "That's like you saying there are 9 geese flying by and me saying what's this 9 your talking about... I've never heard of that number."

Anybody have room on their couch?

 

[md123]

One can only hope Roberts' obvious sell out on Obamacare earned him some goodwill with the left wing fanatics on the court. His opinion on Obamacare is incoherent; he bent himself into a pretzel to avoid striking down the mandate (and thus the law).

Quid pro quo.

 

[hvymax]

One can only hope Roberts' obvious sell out on Obamacare earned him some goodwill with the left wing fanatics on the court. His opinion on Obamacare is incoherent; he bent himself into a pretzel to avoid striking down the mandate (and thus the law).

Quid pro quo.

You get no reach around when compromising with libs.