Need to get good 2A cases to SCOTUS as fast as possible

[lagrangian]

If Obama is re-elected, the various 2nd Amendment rights groups really need to get good 2nd Amendment cases through the court system to SCOTUS as fast as possible.

Pondering the future of SCOTUS after this morning's decision one realizes that Scalia's no spring chicken and if he dies or is forced by bad health to resign with Obama in office you can kiss Heller good-bye because at the moment the libs won't respect it at all (as witnessed by the disgraceful 5-4 decision in McDonald (should have been close to 9-0 given what SCOTUS precedent has said about when the 14th Amendment applies the Bill of Rights rights against the states)) and with a lib replacing Scalia it'll go 5-4 against the 2nd Amendment in a blink where things currently stand.

But if a bunch of cases can get to SCOTUS and be consistently decided in a pro-2A fashion that will at least make it harder for the libs to give Heller the finger since there will be additional precedent and decided cases there.

 

[cekim]

If Obama is re-elected, the various 2nd Amendment rights groups really need to get good 2nd Amendment cases through the court system to SCOTUS as fast as possible.

Pondering the future of SCOTUS after this morning's decision one realizes that Scalia's no spring chicken and if he dies or is forced by bad health to resign with Obama in office you can kiss Heller good-bye because at the moment the libs won't respect it at all (as witnessed by the disgraceful 5-4 decision in McDonald (should have been close to 9-0 given what SCOTUS precedent has said about when the 14th Amendment applies the Bill of Rights rights against the states)) and with a lib replacing Scalia it'll go 5-4 against the 2nd Amendment in a blink where things currently stand.

But if a bunch of cases can get to SCOTUS and be consistently decided in a pro-2A fashion that will at least make it harder for the libs to give Heller the finger since there will be additional precedent and decided cases there.

a. You should look into the SAF and Comm2A - there are good people working the system as fast as it can be worked to make this happen - they can always use more help.
b. The Obamanation shows that we don't even have 5:4 on our side now...

 

[seanc]

a. You should look into the SAF and Comm2A - there are good people working the system as fast as it can be worked to make this happen - they can always use more help.
b. The Obamanation shows that we don't even have 5:4 on our side now...

What I really think this all means is that it is ALL pretty much irrelevant..
The Feds can stop a state from enforcing laws (AZ decision).
The Feds can then refuse to enforce those same laws (exec decision).
Congress now has the power to punish (fine/ tax) every action OR inaction.
Unelected gov agencies can stop you from breathing (co2 emissions, EPA decision)
There is nothing a human can do, or not do that could not be considered "health"

I am quickly moving over to MichaelJR side of the fence..

But I suppose, I am reaching the conclusion that SCOTUS is essentially irrelevant. The facade that individuals having any rights seems to be disappearing.

 

[Bill Nance]

Nothing that is started today will reach the SC prior to March. That's the way it works.

 

[StevieP]

Just because a judge or two gets replaced, doesn't mean they'll re-convene and reconsider settled law, does it? I mean, they don't just get to say "Now that we've got a liberal majority, let's throw out Heller and McDonald, and issue a new ruling."

Wouldn't someone(s) need to raise a case (from the "other" side)? Who could/would be able to raise a case to try to reverse Heller? What would be their standing?

 

[LoginName]

Just because a judge or two gets replaced, doesn't mean they'll re-convene and reconsider settled law, does it? I mean, they don't just get to say "Now that we've got a liberal majority, let's throw out Heller and McDonald, and issue a new ruling."

Wouldn't someone(s) need to raise a case (from the "other" side)? Who could/would be able to raise a case to try to reverse Heller? What would be their standing?

A Liberal SCOTUS can and could reverse Heller and say the 2nd amendment is a collective right and not an individual one.

I have some doubts that they would actually do that.


Since the SCOTUS never applied a level of scrutiny (other than saying some restrictions are allowable), to Heller/McDonald, a more Liberal court could apply a ruling that would leave Heller/McDonald intact, but effectively
render the individual right to keep and bear arms useless... one gun per month is allowable, registration is allowable, assault weapons bans are allowable, mag restrictions are allowable, etc.

It would be politically wiser for them to let Heller/McDonald stand, and reinterpret it.

 

[HTRN]

A Liberal SCOTUS can and could reverse Heller and say the 2nd amendment is a collective right and not an individual one.

I have some doubts that they would actually do that.


Since the SCOTUS never applied a level of scrutiny (other than saying some restrictions are allowable), to Heller/McDonald, a more Liberal court could apply a ruling that would leave Heller/McDonald intact, but effectively
render the individual right to keep and bear arms useless... one gun per month is allowable, registration is allowable, assault weapons bans are allowable, mag restrictions are allowable, etc.

It would be politically wiser for them to let Heller/McDonald stand, and reinterpret it.

Do not forget that regardless of what the law says, RKBA is an individual right.

If governments enact laws that violate our rights, we just have to make choices regarding those rights and if we want to be property that is enslaved to our masters, or if we are free men.


I can write a self-proclaimed law that everyone in my neighborhood has to pay me $1000/year or I put them in my jail. (sounds like government no?) we'll if I can't enforce that with violence, It doesn't matter what law I pass.

As the federal government amasses more and more size and assumes more and more power, its validity decreases. It is just the mafia with a flag.

 

[Jose]

The tipping point can't get here soon enough. I'm not getting any younger and I'd rather not have my daughter be an adult during the shitstorm to come.

 

[lagrangian]

Nothing that is started today will reach the SC prior to March. That's the way it works.

I totally understand that. I don't mean in the next several months. I mean in the next few years (hopefully Scalia, etc. will stay healthy for at least that long).

 

[lagrangian]

Since the SCOTUS never applied a level of scrutiny (other than saying some restrictions are allowable), to Heller/McDonald, a more Liberal court could apply a ruling that would leave Heller/McDonald intact, but effectively
render the individual right to keep and bear arms useless.

Exactly! That's why we need as many good cases to get before SCOTUS as possible while the current lineup is intact. The more things currently in the air (like the standard of scrutiny) are pinned down before the libs take over, the harder it will be for the libs to undo them. If Obama is re-elected the RKBA basically depends on the health of two 76 year old men. Gotta make hay while the sun shines. (And yes, I realize you can't snap your fingers and make cases appear before SCOTUS, but I hope Comm2A, SAF, NRA, etc. has some good stuff in the hopper that can get to SCOTUS in the next several years.)

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

They're on their way: Right to Carry Leader Board

 

[Broc]

Need to get good 2A cases to SCOTUS as fast as possible

lead the charge

 

[lagrangian]

lead the charge

I've previously donated to Comm2A.