.dukkillr said:Now's as good a time as any. Despite the adamant claims here, the 2nd has been something of an ignored calculus problem to the SCOTUS for decades. The language defies an easy interpretation and precedent is rare. This is really going to be a huge ruling, at least where gun bans are particularly strict.
My guess = they punt. They give us a split decision that leaves no clear precedent but rather invalidates some laws and keeps some. I suspect total bans on conventional guns like DC's will be in trouble, while long established bans such as those on automatic weapons survive. Course that's just a guess from a guy who rarely dabbles in appeals work.
Mr Reynolds continues with a third option on the 2nd page of that article, to uphold the lower court's decision that the Washington DC gun ban is invalid in view of the second amendment, and the second amendment is an individual not a collective right. Follow the link provided above in the previous email to read the whole article.Almtnman said:It might go this way.
Glenn Reynolds on the Second Amendment and the options the Supreme Court Faces
* It can find that the Second Amendment doesn't really do anything - that it's merely a relic of an older era. But that's a rather dangerous approach: What other parts of the Constitution might be considered relics? And can a judicial approach that leaves a tenth of the Bill of Rights meaningless possibly be sound?
* It can find that the Second Amendment doesn't grant individual rights, but only protects the right of states to arm their militias (or "state armies," as some gun-control advocates put it). This would make the DC case go away, but at some cost: If states have a constitutional right, as against the federal government, to arm their militias as they see fit, then states that don't like federal gun-control laws could just enroll every law-abiding citizen in the state militia and authorize those citizens to possess machine guns, tanks and other military gear.
posted from http://www.nypost.com/seven/11212007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/lawyers__guns__washington_537742.htm