Quick Karl
member
I just wish they would render a decision on this already.
Heller: "written in that sitting"?
- Thread starter ctdonath
- Start date
- Status
Hypnogator
Member
QK, while I share your impatience, I would much rather see them take their time and write a scholarly opinion that unequivocally establishes the 2nd as an individual right.
We don't need the ambiguity of another Miller decision.
Since this promises to be an historic decision, it will be difficult for Roberts to resist the temptation to write the majority opinion himself.
I want Thomas to write the opinion. He also understands the 2nd amedment. I want a Black Man to write the opinin of the century. I want all Americian citizens to know that what ever race, religion, gender etc. that they are that they have a right to keep and bear arms. I WANT THOMAS!!!! He can write that the 2nd amendment is "the pallidium of liberty" FINALLY.
usmarine0352_2005
member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2005
- Messages
- 2,796
What?
No matter how racist that sounds, I don't care who writes it. As long as it's written strongly for future precedent and cases and the best way possible for individuals and no infringement. Obviously, we all want an individual ruling with strict scrutiny. Hopefully we can get it.
"Prepare for the worst, hope for the best."
usmarine0352_2005
member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2005
- Messages
- 2,796
That's good. Why does it matter if he's black?
P. Plainsman
Member
I think y'all are overthinking this. A Scalia-authored opinion in Heller would be wonderful -- as long as he can hold on to five votes with it.
Quite early in the oral argument, Scalia (sparring with D.C.'s lawyer, Walter Dellinger) clearly expressed sympathy for a right to arms that includes self-defense.
And then this exchange, toward the end of Gura's argument, when Souter was trying to whittle away the right through "empirical" statistical analysis, to save the handgun ban:
Scalia gets it. Both self-defense and a popular militia. He was also by far the most vigorous member of the Court arguing that Second Amendment claims should require strict scrutiny.
PS: Regardless of whether Scalia or somebody else (like Kennedy or the Chief) writes the lead opinion in Heller, I bet we will also hear from Justice Thomas. He will write separately -- hopefully a concurrence! -- and it will be a barn-burner. People on this site will be putting tags from Thomas's separate opinion in Heller in their sigs for decades to come.
Quite early in the oral argument, Scalia (sparring with D.C.'s lawyer, Walter Dellinger) clearly expressed sympathy for a right to arms that includes self-defense.
Oral Argument, p.8. Suffice to say that the self-defense centered, incorporation-ready right y'all are hoping for could also be described as a neo-Blackstonian right.
And then this exchange, toward the end of Gura's argument, when Souter was trying to whittle away the right through "empirical" statistical analysis, to save the handgun ban:
Oral Argument, p.78.
Scalia gets it. Both self-defense and a popular militia. He was also by far the most vigorous member of the Court arguing that Second Amendment claims should require strict scrutiny.
PS: Regardless of whether Scalia or somebody else (like Kennedy or the Chief) writes the lead opinion in Heller, I bet we will also hear from Justice Thomas. He will write separately -- hopefully a concurrence! -- and it will be a barn-burner. People on this site will be putting tags from Thomas's separate opinion in Heller in their sigs for decades to come.
Sistema1927
Member
Why did I just spend 2 minutes reading this thread?
Folks, it will be what it will be, and everything being said here is pure speculation.
Folks, it will be what it will be, and everything being said here is pure speculation.
usmarine0352_2005
member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2005
- Messages
- 2,796
lol. No offense, but you just realized this now?
This is what "discussion forums" are usually about. Especially when it pertains to a court case that has not been ruled on yet.
If we're to believe Scalia wrote the true majority opinion (and not just a concurrence), I bet its a blow-out with a tally of 7-2 or better. If the number of Justices on our side were on less stable ground, Roberts would've had Kennedy write it.
Another thing to look at would be have any Justices not had an opinion from one or more months, and another Justice doubled-up that month? Complex cases will usually get a Justice excused from another opininon so that the final ruling will be as clear as possible.
Kharn
Another thing to look at would be have any Justices not had an opinion from one or more months, and another Justice doubled-up that month? Complex cases will usually get a Justice excused from another opininon so that the final ruling will be as clear as possible.
Kharn
as nice as it would be to give the majority opinion in a case like this, it would also be bad. Either way, you're going down in history. It would be nice to go down in history and not have to come back up in a bad way i.e. a challenge to that opinion that could make or break the 2A, or worse.
I think because of the fact that this is going to be a landmark case on the 2nd amendment regardless of scope or scrutiny, that they'll want the most specifically articulated and informed writer on that issue to issue it. If Scalia fits that bill over anyone else, then he would most likely be the one to give it, depending on the tally. If the tally is as close as possible, then I'd say that Kennedy, Thomas, or roberts would write it to keep it as middle-grounded as they can.
I think because of the fact that this is going to be a landmark case on the 2nd amendment regardless of scope or scrutiny, that they'll want the most specifically articulated and informed writer on that issue to issue it. If Scalia fits that bill over anyone else, then he would most likely be the one to give it, depending on the tally. If the tally is as close as possible, then I'd say that Kennedy, Thomas, or roberts would write it to keep it as middle-grounded as they can.
Ragnar Danneskjold
Member
Kim, you did say "I want a Black Man to write the opini[o]n of the century."
Explain to me how focusing on one's race isn't racist?
Explain to me how focusing on one's race isn't racist?
P. Plainsman
Member
One of these is not like the other! Seriously, I bet Thomas writes an opinion even more hardcore pro-RKBA than Scalia.
Thomas wrote a concurrence in Printz v. U.S. (big Tenth Amendment case that struck down the interim Brady check provisions) in which he hinted that he thought federal background checks for gun purchases violated the Second Amendment.
Thomas is the real deal. But assigning the opinion to him certainly wouldn't keep it "middle-grounded"!!
Sergeant Sabre
Member
"I want a white man to write the opinion of the century"
Now how does it sound?
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
If Roberts writes the decision, I expect it to be very narrow. Something along the lines of 'The Second Amendment is an individual right and the D.C. ban fails to meet any standard of scrutiny.'
Regardless I agree that Thomas will probably write a separate opinion and it will be a very popular one here at THR.
I expect to see a lot of opinions since I imagine each of the Justices will be tempted to argue their views for future litigation issues that are likely to arise.
Regardless I agree that Thomas will probably write a separate opinion and it will be a very popular one here at THR.
I expect to see a lot of opinions since I imagine each of the Justices will be tempted to argue their views for future litigation issues that are likely to arise.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
Then why not say "I want Thomas to write the opinion of the century".
It was racist the way you said it, even if you meant it in a "good" way.
I also want Thomas to write it, but I could care less that he's black or purple, he's simply the finest Justice to ever sit on the court.
ctdonath
Member
While we may see such a choice as objectionable for certain reason, our opponents would/should see such a choice as laudable for exactly the same reason.
He's advocating that choice not because he likes the reasoning, but because our opponents claim to like such reasoning - and thus such a choice would take away one of their biggest objections.
He's advocating that choice not because he likes the reasoning, but because our opponents claim to like such reasoning - and thus such a choice would take away one of their biggest objections.
lookn4varmints
Member
Personally, I'd like to see Justice Alito write the majority opinion here for several reasons:
1. He's the purest Federalist on the court IMHO.
2. The Brady Bunch refers to him as "Machine Gun Sammy" because of his 1996 appellate court decision that the federal ban on machine gun possession was unconstitutional. Alito's authoring of the majority opinion would absolutely launch Sarah and her minions into space in an apoplectic fit. It would be just too rich and delicious!
1. He's the purest Federalist on the court IMHO.
2. The Brady Bunch refers to him as "Machine Gun Sammy" because of his 1996 appellate court decision that the federal ban on machine gun possession was unconstitutional. Alito's authoring of the majority opinion would absolutely launch Sarah and her minions into space in an apoplectic fit. It would be just too rich and delicious!
Sam Adams
Member
Scalia:
The man gets it - almost as if he's channeling the Founders.
That said, Thomas also gets it, and Alito understands that the MG ban is as violative of the 2nd as is DC's ban.
Personally, I don't care which of these three writes the majority opinion, as long as one of them does - because that means that we will AT LEAST have the 2nd declared an individual right and the DC law struck down. How much further we get with this particular decision is anyone's guess, but if we simply get this I'll be happy and the Brady Bunch will be on suicide watch.
If we get individual right and DC's law struck down, look SOON for a suit to overturn the '86 ban, and also for an incorporation case. The antis will be on the defensive, big time. Ah, the schadenfrude will be SOOOO delicious.
But none of us will know anything until sometime Monday AM (and maybe even Thursday).
The man gets it - almost as if he's channeling the Founders.
That said, Thomas also gets it, and Alito understands that the MG ban is as violative of the 2nd as is DC's ban.
Personally, I don't care which of these three writes the majority opinion, as long as one of them does - because that means that we will AT LEAST have the 2nd declared an individual right and the DC law struck down. How much further we get with this particular decision is anyone's guess, but if we simply get this I'll be happy and the Brady Bunch will be on suicide watch.
If we get individual right and DC's law struck down, look SOON for a suit to overturn the '86 ban, and also for an incorporation case. The antis will be on the defensive, big time. Ah, the schadenfrude will be SOOOO delicious.
But none of us will know anything until sometime Monday AM (and maybe even Thursday).
usmarine0352_2005
member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2005
- Messages
- 2,796
Wouldn't it be better to have a Supreme Court Justice who is considered more anti-gun write a strong 2nd Amendment opinion.....that way, the anti's can't say, "It's just a rogue activist judge following their own preset opinion on the 2nd Amendment, just like we thought they would."
The only thing they could say bad about them is, "They interrpeted it wrong."
Sam Adams
Member
I'd agree, if you could find one on our side of this. Also, how strong of an opinion are you going to get from one of them? Theoretically, though, you're right.
More important to me, no matter who writes the opinion, is what the actual holdings are. I think that we've got a win here, "win" being defined as DC's law is overturned because the 2nd protects an individual right. But you can barely win or win in a blowout. A blowout would be the application of strict scrutiny to any other limitations, and strong dicta in the majority and concurring opinions that the same rules apply to states and cities due to the 14th Amendment and also that the federal MG ban is unconstitutional. It ain't who writes it, its what is said that REALLY matters.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked