BREAKING: Justices Rule That 2nd Amendment Also Governs State and Local Gun Laws

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Funny side note.

I have a liberal friend who's calling this decision an act of judicial activism.

They're so cute those liberals.

Ha ha, yeah that's the thing nowadays on EITHER side: If the decision didn't go your way, it's "activism"!

 

[Martialartsblackbelt]

:



And in his judicial opinion, the 2nd Amendment is one that is a privilege of the Citizens of the Unites States. The Chicago law was effectively encroaching upon this, in the eyes of Justice Thomas.

Words are important, it should read RIGHT not privilege

 

[vvvvvvv]

While this is a step forward for gun rights, it is a step backwards for originalism thanks to incorporation through the Due Process clause rather than the Privileges and Immunities clause.

 

[Rod Snell]

Words are important, it should read RIGHT not privilege

The quoted section is taken out of content and your comment is well meant but inappropriate. Justice Thomas was specifically discussing whether the 2nd was incorporated by the "priviledges and immunities" clause of the 14th amendment.

The main discussions in the opinion use the term "rights of the 2nd amendment."

Justice Thomas is the strongest advocate of full incorporation of the 2nd now sitting on the Supreme court, and is arguing that direct full incorporation is justified, rather than the limited scope of having a handgun in the home for self defense.

You want to have something to get upset about, Read Ginsberg's assertion that we don't need handguns because Japan does not have them, and they are civilized. Chief Justice Roberts refuted her argument by pointing out that Japan does not have jury trials, either, and we're discussing the US Constitution.

 

[Glocktogo]

It means that States right have no power period. Dont know why people are happy this is a lose not a win.

It shows that the States have no power what so ever. Sorry to rain on your parades but while people are clapping, your clapping away your 10th amendment as well.


Chitown gun ban was Chittown and Illinois's business had nothing to do with the Supreme Court or our gun rights.

With out the other rights in place the 2A is useless as well.

I don't think you understand States rights as enumerated by the 10th Amendment.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

You can quibble about whether this modifier is equivalent to the militia modifier of the 2nd Amendment, but my view of the SCOTUS opinion is not that it screws up States rights, but that they are subordinate to the rights of the People in reference to the BoR. Outside the BoR, the states still have as much power as they had before the ruling. This simply reinforces that States and municipalities cannot use the 10th to screw with the rights of the people.

I'm not sure why you'd consider that a lose?

 

[Glocktogo]

so what does this all mean?

It means that Chitown will now resort to guerilla lawfare against their citizens who wish to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights. They will create severe and opressive restrictions in order to turn away all but the most determined citizens who wish to own guns.

This opinion is a wishy washy deflection. It's 5% away from being worthless in getting the rights of Chicagoans restored. Thomas should have been allowed to write the majority opinion and determine under what rule of law it was reversed. He's the only one who truly understands the Constitution.

 

[inactive]

Words are important, it should read RIGHT not privilege

Not even close my friend. No one owns me or my understanding of constitutional judicial process. Please save your flashy emoticons for General Discussion.

The quoted section is taken out of content and your comment is well meant but inappropriate. Justice Thomas was specifically discussing whether the 2nd was incorporated by the "priviledges and immunities" clause of the 14th amendment.

The main discussions in the opinion use the term "rights of the 2nd amendment."

Justice Thomas is the strongest advocate of full incorporation of the 2nd now sitting on the Supreme court, and is arguing that direct full incorporation is justified, rather than the limited scope of having a handgun in the home for self defense.

You want to have something to get upset about, Read Ginsberg's assertion that we don't need handguns because Japan does not have them, and they are civilized. Chief Justice Roberts refuted her argument by pointing out that Japan does not have jury trials, either, and we're discussing the US Constitution.

Thank you. As you indicated, "Privilege" was intentionally selected as I was referring to the Privileges and Immunities clause of Amendment XIV.

 

[inactive]

While this is a step forward for gun rights, it is a step backwards for originalism thanks to incorporation through the Due Process clause rather than the Privileges and Immunities clause.

You are right on, sir !!

 

[Nraman]

Finally something going in the direction of freedom. What a great day.

It is a victory, not big enough to make everybody happy.
I am happy, The decision was 5-4. If one of those 5 retires the Obama appointment will create a 5-4 against the 2A. So far the SCOTUS respects previous opinions. The last two decisions will be helpful when the crazed socialists obama appoints take over.

 

[Fourtho]

The 10th Amendment has not had much effect on Supreme Court rulings. Very few if any cases pled on a 10th Amendment basis win.

States rights' were curtailed by the post civil war amendments. The point of the 14th Amendment was, over time, to ensure that the people's fundamental rights were safeguarded not only from the central government, but also from the states. Personally, I think it's a good thing that no state can establish a state religion just like I think it's a good thing that no state can ban gun ownership. Hooray for this particular and suspicious loss of states rights. I don't want my state to have the right to ban guns.