[MicroBalrog]

What do we know of the various Justices? Are they pro-gun or anti-gun people? Did anyone bother to check their record?

[Blackhawk]

It doesn't matter what their personal biases are. Didn't you know that SC Justices only consider Constitutional precedent and the Constitution itself in deciding cases before them? :rolleyes:

[Quartus]

We can count on Ginsburg to destroy the Constitution at every opportunity. There has never been a person (can't call her a "Justice") that has had so little regard for the Constitution.

Souter is not much better. How he ever got nominated by Bush I is beyond me.

The only one we can count on to actually uphold the Constitution as the Founders intended it is Thomas.

The rest are probably a toss up on the 2A.


It's a dangerous time to take a 2A case to the Court.

[Jim March]

Well the 9th Circuit knows full well that their cases and precedents on the RKBA are a confused mess. Judge Gould made a point of saying so in Nordyke. Fresno Rifle lies about Miller and relies on the racially disasterous Cruikshank, Hickman is just a flat turd of a decision, and Silveira is a freakshow featuring Bell-Liar as chief "unnatural oddity" in the carnival tent but by no means alone :barf:.

I am 100% convinced they're going to hear Silveira and/or Nordyke En Banc *first* if for no other reason than to "get their story straight". And I'm not convinced we'd come out badly in En Banc (11 judge panel of the 9th), come to think.

THEN if it goes to the Supremes, things get interesting. Clarence is 100% on our side. The rest...we THINK we've got four more.

:rolleyes:

[Quartus]

Clarence is 100% on our side.


Yep. But WHY is important. He's on "our" side because he and we are all on the Constitution's side.

[Standing Wolf]

...WHY is important. He's on "our" side because he and we are all on the Constitution's side.

We need to keep repeating that message. Preserving and protecting the Second Amendment is first and last a civil rights issue.