The Big Heller Decision Discussion Thread - AFFIRMED 2ND AS INDIVIDUAL RIGHT

[Schofield3]

Alright!!!!

 

[kevindsingleton]

5-4 is better than a plurality! It's like Christmas!

 

[Hanzerik]

Yes.

 

[19-3Ben]

G-d Bless America!!!!

 

[Fly320s]

Affirmed.

 

[ieszu]

Woot!

And I am not sure who has more lag... THR or SCOTUSblog... =)

 

[Augustwest]

This is a good day to be an American.

 

[jaak]

they voted on ideology though.... not on what the ****in constitution says. screw the 4 who dissented.

 

[Owens]

10:13
Ben Winograd -

The Court has released the opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290), on whether the District’s firearms regulations – which bar the possession of handguns and require shotguns and rifles to be kept disassembled or under trigger lock – violate the Second Amendment. The ruling below, which struck down the provisions in question, is affirmed.



Justice Scalia wrote the opinion. Justice Breyer dissented, joined by Justices Stevens, Souter and Ginsburg. We will provide a link to the decision as soon as it is available.
10:13
Tom Goldstein - Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm.

 

[CDignition]

Wow.. a narrow Margin.. Thats pretty amazing.

 

[Robert Hairless]

A 5-4 majority:

Tom Goldstein - It is striking that the decision is not clouded by ambiguity created by separate opinions. One opinion on each side.

 

[divemedic]

Only a 5-4 decision. That's not as good as it could've been.

A win is a win. Can't wait till I can read it and see the details.

 

[BlisteringSilence]

Tom Goldstein - It is striking that the decision is not clouded by ambiguity created by separate opinions. One opinion on each side.

That is great, great news. GREAT news.

 

[Sapanther]

One opinon each side!!!! ... and i know im slow ... sue me

 

[lance22]

watching the blog. I'm surprised that four supremes dissented. That's just too close.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Wow I was totally wrong on that one. I thought there would be a ton of opinions; but it is one clear majority opinion and one dissent.

Edited to add: Apparently two dissents; but one clear majority.

 

[bass806]

A win for the good guys!!!

 

[JohnRov]

Awesome, at least that argument is put to rest.

 

[skywalkrNCSU]

Whoo Hooo!!!

 

[bigfoot311]

wow wasnt expecting it to be 5-4 but its still 5 for the good guys!!!!!

 

[usmarine0352_2005]

Ooraah.

 

[zxcvbob]

"Justice Breyer dissented, joined by Justices Stevens, Souter and Ginsburg. We will provide a link to the decision as soon as it is available."

Now you know why presidential campaigns are so important... even if you feel you only have a choice between two twits

Weren't at least two of those appointed by Republicans?

Bob

 

[Ash]

And this is probably the fastest-expanding thread in the history of THR...

Souter was for certain Bush 41, Ford appointed Stevens. But, Scalia (Reagan) Roberts, Alito (Bush 43) Thomas (Bush 41), and Kennedy (Reagan) were also Republican appointees.

Ginsburg and Breyer were Clinton appointees.

Therefore, while Republicans did appoint half the liberal wing of the court, Clinton did the other half. None of the conservative (and Heller affirming) justices came from Democrats. All the Democrat appointees (who voted against Heller) are liberal. I'll take 66% good versus 100% bad.


Oh, and nicely enough, no plurality and no concurrences.

Ash

 

[ilbob]

Tom Goldstein - Apologies - there is a second dissenting opinion, but only one majority - no plurality and no concurrences.

 

[dakuda]

Two dissenting opinions. Does that mean that they cannot even agree on why they disagree?