Silvester v. Kamala Harris CA 10 Day Wait

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!

    • Register Log in
    P

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,912
    WV
    Boxcab said:
    I find it interesting that they (except for Thomas!) ignored this case. It was a great opportunity to remand it back and tell the lower court to try again. The SC Justices would not have to make the eventual ruling, let the lower courts do the work for them. The question is why do they let this go on this way? Why not force the lower courts to do the work for them. It could be done nice and slow, incrementally, and keep the SCOUS on the side lines.



    .
    Click to expand...

    Agreed. A short Per Curiam telling CA9 that their opinion ain't intermediate scrutiny would have allowed them to duck the underlying issue.
    Then again, they may have known CA9 would send it straight back with a few words changed here or there.
     
    Boxcab

    Boxcab

    MSI EM
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 22, 2007
    7,909
    AA County
    press1280 said:
    Agreed. A short Per Curiam telling CA9 that their opinion ain't intermediate scrutiny would have allowed them to duck the underlying issue.
    Then again, they may have known CA9 would send it straight back with a few words changed here or there.
    Click to expand...

    This is why I just can't see what the Justices are doing. They can keep their "hands clean" by sending these cases back down for further review and incrementally develop 2A jurisprudence (if I am using that word properly) and only provide guidance.

    The only thing that makes sense is that too many of the Justices really want to kill the 2A out right, and in doing so they a shirking their responsibility to upholding the Constitution... they wish to rewrite it.




    .
     
    S

    ShafTed

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 21, 2013
    2,223
    Juuuuust over the line
    Boxcab said:
    The only thing that makes sense is that too many of the Justices really want to kill the 2A out right, and in doing so they a shirking their responsibility to upholding the Constitution... they wish to rewrite it.
    Click to expand...

    Four of them do, for certain. If they thought that they could depend on Kennedy's vote, you can bet they would have been taking every one of the 2A cases, and the 2A would have been judicially repealed nationwide by now. (As opposed to only a few circuits as we currently have.)
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
    Citadel Firearms Training MD banner ad

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,402
    Messages
    7,280,307
    Members
    33,449
    Latest member
    Tactical Shepherd

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom