McDonald V. Chicago Oral arguments 3/2/10

[Roadking Larry]

The SCOTUS will hear McDonald V. Chicago Tuesday 3/2/10.
Transcript will be released late in the day.
http://www.scotusblog.com/





If you don't know what this is about you ain't been paying attention.

 

[poopgiggle]

Here's a few articles on the case

http://volokh.com/category/mcdonald-v-city-of-chicago/

 

[TallPrairie]

First reports suggest that Gura's argument for incorporating the 2d Amendment right to arms against the states through the 14th Amdt. Privileges or Immunities Clause was decisively rejected by almost the entire Court. (He will probably pick up one vote for this theory of incorporation, to judge from Justice Thomas's past opinions. Thomas, per his usual practice, did not ask any questions at the argument.)

However, it looks like the other theory -- that the 2d Amendment right to arms is incorporated against the states via the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment -- has a lot of support, probably a majority, maybe a big majority.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2010/03/analysis-2d-amendment-extension-likely/#more-17012

http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2...ase-supreme-court-sounds-note-of-caution.html

Put that together with Thomas, who will vote for incorporation, just not under the Due Process theory, and it looks like we've got incorporation.

The interesting question will be what (if anything) the Court says about the standard of scrutiny to be applied to state and local gun restrictions. It sounds like the left-liberal Justices want to really water down the standard of scrutiny.

 

[Gideon]

Idea...Oklahoma should enact a law that prevents public gathering, public shows of religion, and the publishing of any material not pre-read by the OSBI...

Since apparently the Supremacy Clause and the blatant wording of the Bill of Rights DON'T prevent the States from following the same limits as the Feds.

 

[poopgiggle]

First reports suggest that Gura's argument for incorporating the 2d Amendment right to arms against the states through the 14th Amdt. Privileges or Immunities Clause was decisively rejected by almost the entire Court. (He will probably pick up one vote for this theory of incorporation, to judge from Justice Thomas's past opinions. Thomas, per his usual practice, did not ask any questions at the argument.)

However, it looks like the other theory -- that the 2d Amendment right to arms is incorporated against the states via the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment -- has a lot of support, probably a majority, maybe a big majority.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2010/03/analysis-2d-amendment-extension-likely/#more-17012

http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2...ase-supreme-court-sounds-note-of-caution.html

Put that together with Thomas, who will vote for incorporation, just not under the Due Process theory, and it looks like we've got incorporation.

The interesting question will be what (if anything) the Court says about the standard of scrutiny to be applied to state and local gun restrictions. It sounds like the left-liberal Justices want to really water down the standard of scrutiny.

I'm pretty sure that's what the decision was in Nordyke too, i.e. incorporation via the due process clause. Remember that came out of the 9th circuit which is generally considered very liberal.

E: Wow, database is screwy again. LEEEET'S DOOOO THE TIIME WAAARP AGAAAAIIIIIN!!

 

[poopgiggle]

Idea...Oklahoma should enact a law that prevents public gathering, public shows of religion, and the publishing of any material not pre-read by the OSBI...

Since apparently the Supremacy Clause and the blatant wording of the Bill of Rights DON'T prevent the States from following the same limits as the Feds.

That doesn't hold since the 1st Amendment has been incorporated against the states.

 

[Fyrtwuck]

Somebody translate all that to English please!

 

[vvvvvvv]

...so "conservatives" want federal law to trump state law?

That's basically what incorporation is.

 

[338Shooter]

...so "conservatives" want federal law to trump state law?

That's basically what incorporation is.

No, we want federal protection from states trampling on God given rights. That's pretty much what incorporation of the 2A is.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

No, we want federal protection from states trampling on God given rights. That's pretty much what incorporation of the 2A is.

Yup.

Woody