The Case against Incorporation

[ArmedBear]

They would have no basis to strike down Chicago's law without incorporating.

I don't know. As of today, they could. Evidently, the President of the United States is also the Mayor of Chicago, and the President of the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce, as well as the city's delegate to the International Olympic Committee.

One could argue that, however the 14th Amendment impacts the 2nd Amendment in other parts of the country, the government of Chicago is indistinguishable from the Federal Government.

 

[ilbob]

What's the chances that the court decides against incorporation on the grounds of the legal quandary and procedures the states would be in to have to rewrite all their firearm laws? And would incorporation make 923c moot?

There are no states that ban handguns in the home. Just a few cities. Probably a dozen or less. Those are the only laws that would be directly affected by this case.

Even a carry case would probably only affect directly the laws of IL and WI, since neither state allows for any useful carry for private citizens. All other states could just start issuing CC permits on a more or less shall-issue basis and be in compliance. Would not even have to change their laws (except probably NYC). Just their practices, and maybe in a few cases the expense and PITA issues associated with getting a CC permit. There are already several states that have may issue laws on the books that in practice are shall issue (CT and AL come to mind).

i am not real sure it has anything to do with 923c. 923c is about licensing interstate and foreign commerce (in firearms), which very clearly the federal government has power to regulate.

 

[hugh damright]

the 14th was designed to ... apply the protections of the Bill of Rights to State legislative actions.

I think this is our favorite myth, but a little off topic.

 

[Chunkychuck]

ilbob, when I saw your response I realized my mistake. I should have said 926c, which gives a federal defense for transporting firearms from one destination to another when traveling through places like chicago who have restrictive gun laws.

 

[legaleagle_45]

Isn't choosing a case that has the Slaughterhouse decision opening a can of worms that takes away from the 2nd Amendment issue and could cause us problems?

No, in fact it may have been necessary. The grant of cert wording is of interest. It provides for a decision based upon alternate theories. There may not have been enough votes to incorporate under standard due process, and there might not have been enough votes by overruling Slaughterhouse... but there probaly are enough votes for incorporation with some using due process and some using the overruling of Slaughterhouse... thereby granting incorporation by virtue of a plurality opinion.

 

[230therapy]

Incorporation is for 14th Amendment citizens.

 

[ArmedBear]

I think this is our favorite myth, but a little off topic.

And I think that a cursory study of the history of the 14th leaves no question about its intent.

I think you have the burden of proving this, too, since my view is one shared by legal scholars and historians all over the political spectrum.

So have at it. It's hardly a thread hijack.

 

[Dannix]

New Jersey could outlaw all guns all the time. If you disagree with your state, you can move.

Um, are you stating this would be constitutional, or just that the would pawn themselves?

"the peoples right..."