Second Amendment Drama at the Supreme Court Has Implications for 2016

[OchoBlue 3]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/05/14/Second-Amendment-Drama-at-the-Supreme-Court-and-2016-Election

 

 

[magnawing 5]

Best explanation I've seen on why SCOTUS may have passed on Drake...because Gura often attempts to over-reach in his arguments.

[HBecwithFn7 296]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/05/14/Second-Amendment-Drama-at-the-Supreme-Court-and-2016-Election

 

What implications do you think it might have on the 2016 Pres. campaign (other than where each candidate stands on it)?

[Malsua 1,422]

 

“Peruta will present a great opportunity for the Supreme Court to clarify that the core Second Amendment right extends to the home;

 

Sure...and NJ will rationalize this as saying "that's fine and all, you have a right, you simply now need to prove you have a need to exercise that right"

[wooly bugger 1]

Very informative article. This whole subject is fascinating.

[ryan_j 0]

No one should have any reason to celebrate Drake being denied. Klukowski also makes some very wrong assumptions.

[springfieldxds 0]

i truly believe scotus would rather have Clement argue the case rather than Gura, if what the articles say is true it sounds like Gura isnt that good of a lawyer

 

i didnt know Gura asked scotus to overturn Slaughter house, which is ridiculous, a case like that has to be perfect 

 

i wonder why saf keeps Gura

[A-Tech 8]

I wonder the same thing, especially after Gura said that comprise is alright.

[springfieldxds 0]

No one should have any reason to celebrate Drake being denied. Klukowski also makes some very wrong assumptions.

this is true but i believe its best we have Clement argue such a big case, he is more than certain to win the case

 

its no surprise that Gura almost lost Heller and Mc donald, well technically Clement won Mc donald, the court basically ignored Gura in Mc donald and didnt even use Guras arguments in Heller, its also true that Heller didnt want Gura to argue the "Heller 2" case

[springfieldxds 0]

I wonder the same thing, especially after Gura said that comprise is alright.

probably has to do with a contract, i wouldn't be surprised if Saf drops him once his contract is up

 

The NRA was really on its game when they got Clement 

[Pythagoras 2]

Thanks for the article, lots of good info

[wooly bugger 1]

No one should have any reason to celebrate Drake being denied. Klukowski also makes some very wrong assumptions.

Not celebrating. Just not despairing. Which, this month is the closest I'll come to celebrating.

[ryan_j 0]

Klukowski seems thrilled that we got kicked to the curb. You should have heard him on Cam and Co. 

[springfieldxds 0]

Klukowski seems thrilled that we got kicked to the curb. You should have heard him on Cam and Co. 

do you have a link?

[springfieldxds 0]

do you have a link?

never mind found it

[jackandjill 683]

Hindsight is 20/20.

[Spartiati 63]

No one should have any reason to celebrate Drake being denied. Klukowski also makes some very wrong assumptions.

 

I agree, I had several issues with the article:

 

"In that regard Drake had some baggage. It might have forced the justices to rule on whether concealed-carry permits are unconstitutional."

 

This wasn't the ask.  Gura wasn't arguing that permits are unconstitutional but rather that arbitrary requirements to issue the permit are unconstitutional.

 

"He is also saying the statute’s requirement that an applicant be of “good moral character” is unconstitutional." i.e. law abiding citizen

 

Really, I certainly didn't get that in my read... 

[jackandjill 683]

"The Supreme Court is offered 8,000 cases each year, and takes 80—that’s one percent. So the justices are extremely picky in which cases they take."

 

May be, we ALL should be applying for CCW , get denied and line up case after case and get that 8000 count to 80000. If this was just about percentages, I am sure we will win.  Silly, but a thought.

[n4p226r 105]

how is peruta the better case?  as of now, isn't it dead unless they want to give the AG (who wanted nothing to do with it) her cake and let her eat it too, which i guess at this point we would prefer, just so it gets to the SC

[ryan_j 0]

"The Supreme Court is offered 8,000 cases each year, and takes 80—that’s one percent. So the justices are extremely picky in which cases they take."

 

May be, we ALL should be applying for CCW , get denied and line up case after case and get that 8000 count to 80000. If this was just about percentages, I am sure we will win. Silly, but a thought.

It doesn't work that way. But nonetheless it would be good for us to all apply en masse to show that NJ issues few permits. This could be used in pantano or a similar case.

[illy 1]

Interesting. This might explain why Gura is pressing the 9th to declare Peruta moot.

[kman 56]

Encouraging!

 

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk