Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

2A Supreme Court scenarios: 2008

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Fletchette, Jun 17, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Fletchette

    Fletchette Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,398
    Location:
    WY
    So it looks like we are going to have our day in court; as you know the DC handgun ban was ruled unconstitutional my the DC Federal Circuit court, forcing the Supreme Court to either let the ruling stand (Yay! 2A is ruled an individual right!) or hear the case. Since I see the Supreme Court justices as four pro-Bill of Rights, four statists and one unknown, it could go either way.

    If the Supreme Court upholds the lower court decision, we win :D. If the Supreme Court rules differently, they could either throw the lower court's ruling out (saying that 2A only specifies a National Guard :barf:) or pass some strange, convoluted, hard to understand opinion that leaves everyone wondering what the Justices are smoking (the most likely scenario :scrutiny: ).

    Lastly, I do not see a Democrat President (like Hillary) being able to stomach a ruling that allows citizens to walk around the nation's capitol carrying guns, so there could be some sort of Executive Order countering the Judicial ruling (instigating a Constitutional crisis) or even a rushed through Amendment to repeal the Second Amendment (hey, if Congress can ignore overwhelming opposition of the illegal immigrant amnesty bill, they could pass an Amendment overturning the Bill of Rights). This would also cause a Constitutional crisis as the overturning of the Bill of Rights would not be taken well by the states, and I suspect there would be more than a passing attempt by some to secede.

    So, how do you think 2008 will go down? Under the various scenarios that could lead to a Constitutional crisis, what would happen and what do you think is a justifiable response?

    I really hope that the Supreme Court does it’s job and confirms the Second Amendment to be an individual right, or else this country will be in a great big mess…
     
  2. ancient_philosophy

    ancient_philosophy member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    56
    yes, dont we all know how the Draconian gun laws in DC cracked down on gun crimes...... (sic):scrutiny:
     
  3. eric_t12

    eric_t12 Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2007
    Messages:
    172
    Location:
    SD
    but they did crack down on gun crimes.

    my soldier is from Baltimore, and DC (off and on) and he said all his friends who weren't on crack had a gun...

    wait... did you mean something else? :p
     
  4. LAK Supply

    LAK Supply Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Messages:
    216
    Location:
    Wild Wyo.....
    This will not happen..... 2/3 state majority for repeal is not going to happen any time soon.

    As for the Parker, the decision is highly likely to be in our favor if they grant.
     
  5. Gifted

    Gifted Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    1,009
    Location:
    Missouri
    Problem with an amendment is that it doesn't just have to go through Congress, but be ratified by the states, by a large margin. That's not going to happen easily, nor quickly.
     
  6. Langenator

    Langenator Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,689
    Location:
    Ft Belvoir, VA
    Actually, it's 2/3 of each chamber of Congress, and 3/4 of the state legislatures.

    And the original poster seems to have forgotten that SCOTUS can't rule one way or the other if DC doesn't appeal the Circuit Court's decision, which hasn't happened yet.
     
  7. Fletchette

    Fletchette Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,398
    Location:
    WY
    Not quite, there are two, seperate ways. The first method is for a bill to pass both houses of the legislature, by a two-thirds majority in each. The second method is for a Constitutional Convention to be called by two-thirds of the legislatures of the States. Each state must then pass it by a three-fourths vote. Neither depend on each other.

    Do you really doubt that they will appeal? If they let it stand, well, the current ruling is a liberal's worst nightmare. Not only would people be allowed to own guns but DC would probably be forced to institute some form of CCW permits.

    So I do not doubt that it will be appealed, unfortunately.
     
  8. Kelly J

    Kelly J Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    Messages:
    162
    Location:
    Missouri
    I wouldn't look for anything to happen until after the 08 Presidential Elections, at the earliest.
     
  9. LAK Supply

    LAK Supply Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Messages:
    216
    Location:
    Wild Wyo.....
    The Parker ruling has been stayed for cert; it happened a couple of weeks ago. The only reason this happens is because there is a pending appeal. DC is in the process of appealing and the only question now is whether or not the Supremes will hear the case. There is a high likelihood that the case will be reviewed by SCOTUS because there is a definite split between circuits, and now the DC court (it's own animal) has added to this.

    If the case is heard it will likely be done by this time next year, and it will have little or nothing to do with the election in terms of timeframe. As well, a favorable ruling by the justices is likely as the scope of the actual argument of Parker is very narrow. As well, a favorable ruling with Parker would not change the firearms laws across the nation; what it would do is open those laws to challenge under new jurisprudence.
     
  10. jpk1md

    jpk1md Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2007
    Messages:
    620
    Just because its been stayed doesn't mean that DC is 100% OBLIGATED to appeal to SCOTUS. They could simply take the time to craft new draconian laws that essentially maintain the ban due to excessive regulation and implement them at the end of the 90 stay.....IF they choose NOT to appeal they may catch hell from the courts but...oh well.

    IF DC does nothing more than craft a new draconian law that is essentially a ban then we'll likely see the whole process begin again with a new equivalent of Parker...the only difference would be that it would likely hit the courts after the 2008 elections when the Anti's feel they MAY have more power.

    The strings/decision to appeal/not appeal are being pulled at levels far above Fenty/DC.

    I expect that we'll hear if DC is going to appeal within the next 30 days or so.
     
  11. ConstitutionCowboy

    ConstitutionCowboy member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,230
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    Still Not Right

    Amendments start either in Congress with the approval of at least 2/3 of each house, or if the legislatures of 2/3 of the states call for a convention to propose an amendment(s). Any amendments proposed by 2/3 of each house of Congress, or in convention by 2/3 of the states, must then be ratified. Congress will then decide if the proposed amendment(s) shall be ratified either by 3/4 of the states by conventions held in each state, or by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states(not 3/4 of the legislatures in each state).

    In numbers, it looks like this:
    • Proposal
      • Either: Passed by 67 Senators and 290 Representatives,
      • Or: Passed by 34 states in convention.
    • Ratification: (Congress chooses which method.)
      • Either by 38 of the states in a convention held in each state;
      • Or by the legislatures of 38 states.

    Woody
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2007
  12. Henry Bowman

    Henry Bowman Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    6,717
    Location:
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    I believe you overstate the scope of the ruling. DC residents could get permission to buy a handgun (if they can find an FFL in DC) and to keep it in operable condition within their home. The next steps way follow, but not under this ruling.
     
  13. Mazeman

    Mazeman Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2007
    Messages:
    113
    Location:
    NH
    DC *must* decide by August whether or not they'll appeal to SCOTUS. If they decide to, there's no reason for the Supremes to delay their decision on whether or not to grant cert. So, that decision should be made by year's end, and my guess would be they'd take the case, making this an election year issue.

    Because of this, my prediction is that DC will *not* appeal. They'll let the ruling stand, and institute some very strict allowances for gun ownership, similar to NYC (as opposed to the ban they currently have). Then there will be a never-ending parade of legal challenges (to laws inside and outside of DC) through the DC circuit over the next decade. Sure it's not great for them, but the alternative- appealing (and possibly losing) during an election year- is worse. This is my guess on how national gun control advocates and Dem Party leader are advising Mayor Fenty.

    That said, I hope I'm wrong, and it goes all the way to Scotus.
     
  14. Fletchette

    Fletchette Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,398
    Location:
    WY
    Gotcha. This is very clear. So basically I think we all agree that it would be very, very difficult to pass an Amendment to overturn the 2A. However, in today's make-it-up-as-you-go-along political environment, I do not think it is implausible that a Hillary would try to null out the Supreme Court ruling with an executive order with the force of law (a trick she learned from her husband). Even if we think that is completely unconstitutional a lot of Washington drones would go along with it and enforce it. That would be a constitutional crisis.
     
  15. tulsamal

    tulsamal Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    796
    Location:
    Vinita, OK
    It's DARN hard to pass or repeal amendments. Which is exactly the intention. Those of us who lived through the 70's remember the ERA amendment. It was going to constitutionally give women "equal rights." There were lots of men that supported it. And woman are a majority in the US anyway. And yet the amendment never did manage to become part of the Constitution.

    That's what happens to nearly every proposed amendment.

    Easier for politicians to just ensure that, over time, the courts rule that the written text means something different than what we all thought it meant!

    Gregg
     
  16. ServiceSoon

    ServiceSoon Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,404
    Location:
    Michiana
    my scenario

    I imagine the USSC will rule the second applies to the people, because this is irrefutable truth and any other ruling would be foolish.

    Some time after the ruling another tragedy will occur and politicians will preach they will fix the problem with gun control and with the help of the NRA and the likes-you know Brady etc they will further infringe upon the peoples right to bear arms and infringe upon the tenth amendment.

    Then we will be one step closer to a utopia or we will be one step closer to another Germany, China, maybe Gaza, etc etc etc. You be the judge, because after all you are a part of “we the people.”
     
  17. tepin

    tepin Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2006
    Messages:
    562
    Location:
    AZ
    so if the ussc says the 2A is an individual right, what does that really get us? we can keep buying guns and the states keep restricting where we can take them? :confused:
     
  18. ConstitutionCowboy

    ConstitutionCowboy member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,230
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    I'd be much happier and comfortable if the Supreme Court ruled in line with the Second Amendment - that being that the right shall not be infringed.

    Lets assume the Second Amendment simply said , "The Right to Keep and Bear Arms shall not be infringed." No mention of the people, or the security of a state, or of the fact that a well regulated militia is necessary for anything. Then there would be no argument at all about who owns the right, and to whose benefit the right shall not be infringed. No law could be written that infringed upon the right.

    It is no different now, except it is actually a right of the people. The Amendment says so. However, the logic remains the same and the right shall not be infringed. I don't think I can make it any simpler, though I keep trying.

    Woody

    A law that says you cannot fire your gun in the middle of downtown unless in self defense is not unconstitutional. Laws that prohibit brandishing except in self defense or handling your gun in a threatening or unsafe manner would not be unconstitutional. Laws can be written that govern some of the uses of guns. No law can be written that infringes upon buying, keeping, storing, carrying, limiting caliber, limiting capacity, limiting quantity, limiting action, or any other act that would infringe upon the keeping or bearing of arms. That is the truth and simple reality of the limits placed upon government by the Second Amendment to the Constitution. B.E.Wood
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2007
  19. ctdonath

    ctdonath Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Messages:
    3,618
    Location:
    Cumming GA
    New M16s for $1000.
    And no AWB-II.
    And, the biggie, the chance to get RKBA "incorporated to the states" via the 14th Amendment, at which point the bulk of 20,000 gun control laws evaporate.
     
  20. Ratzinger_p38

    Ratzinger_p38 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2007
    Messages:
    755
    Location:
    Ohio
    Whoa..droool.
     
  21. Firethorn

    Firethorn Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2004
    Messages:
    1,386
    Ratzinger_p38, those would be for good M-16. Replacement cost for the AF's was listed at $420 last time I looked.
     
  22. Kelly J

    Kelly J Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    Messages:
    162
    Location:
    Missouri
    I personally would hope to have the Supreme Court hear the case, and uphold the DC Circuit findings, and that decision lead to a lot of challenges to other laws, and have them reversed in favor of the 2nd Amendment, restoring the rights that have been lost over the years.
     
  23. LawBot5000

    LawBot5000 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2007
    Messages:
    653
    Location:
    Florida mostly
    Long term possibly but short term, no way.

    If (and it looks increasingly unlikely at this point) the DC gov appeals Parker, the supreme court will not get to rule on incorporation. The only question is a narrow one about whether the 2nd amendment prohibits outlawing handguns or the keep of arms for self defense. All the dicta about reasonable restrictions would remain unanswered.

    The immediate effects of such a ruling is that:
    -it would conflict with a lot of precedent in the federal circuits, denying them the easy way out of saying "blah blah Miller = collective right case closed." All of those circuits would have to start accepting 2nd amendment cases again and have to start ruling in a manner consistent with the standard model
    -it would open up the door for future questions (not at the suprme court level initially, that would follow many years later) about what sort of restrictions upon the right are permissible.
    -and DC's little law would be overturned
     
  24. tepin

    tepin Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2006
    Messages:
    562
    Location:
    AZ
    makes sense. i cannot imagine any ruling creating a 180 or 360 degree turn from where we are today as far as guns go. it would just fix minor debate issues in places like DC and CA. Maybe. I just hope I die of old age before I see the U.S. go the way of the UK. I read somewhere that the crime rate in Brittian leaped ahead of New York, probably because they banned knives too.

    Thanks for your reply
     
  25. 71Commander

    71Commander Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,336
    Location:
    Headin back to Johnson City
    If the cow wins, here's what will happen. She will arrange for an accident *wink,wink* of the 4 pro gun Justices and then get 4 anti's on the bench prior to the ruling.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page