Tuesday, May 08, 2007
No Rehearing En Banc for Parker Case
The three judge panel of the D.C. Circuit court of appeals which decided the Parker case recently, holding, in a divided opinion, that the Second Amendment provides a private right to keep and bear arms (remarkably, just as it states) will be the final word on the subject unless the Supreme Court grants the expected petition for Cert. and reviews the decision. The request for en banc rehearing was denied.
They just might.
They just might.
Labels: Parker case; Second Amendment
# posted by Roger Fraley @ 5:21 PM 
Comments:
<< Home
Maybe in light of a SCOTUS ruling upholding the 2nd Amendment as a individual right, the ACLU would become the rabid watch dog of THAT civil right as well.... Or then again maybe their lack of concern for a trespass on that right in light of a SCOTUS ruling would expose them for the fakes that I believe them to be.
I haven't respected the ACLU since about 1980. I beleiver there is no chance of it becoming a champion of the Second Amendment under any circumstances. Thanks for the comment.
Hopefully in light of a SCOTUS rulling affirming an individual right to keep and bear arms and the likley response from the ACLU to such a rulling, other people who uwould otherwise support the ACLU might begin to turn their back to them as well.
I've been a member of the ACLU. When I had decided to drop that membership, I sent a letter to the organization explaining that the reason was that I was leaving was that they were cherry-picking civil rights to support. (I specifically mentioned 2nd Amendment rights.)
In return, they sent me a position paper explaining that they had determined that the 2A only supported a collective right. (I found it pretty much precisely as convincing as you might think.) I wonder how they might square that position with a (much to be hoped for) SCOTUS ruling in favor of an individual right?
Oh well, they have bright lawyers; I'm sure they'll figure out some way to ignore what they don't like.
ps. I actually think that the ACLU does some valuable work. They're probably, on balance, a force for good. But the ratio of valuable to pernicious work has been dropping over the last two decades or so, and parity is rapidly approaching.
Post a Comment
In return, they sent me a position paper explaining that they had determined that the 2A only supported a collective right. (I found it pretty much precisely as convincing as you might think.) I wonder how they might square that position with a (much to be hoped for) SCOTUS ruling in favor of an individual right?
Oh well, they have bright lawyers; I'm sure they'll figure out some way to ignore what they don't like.
ps. I actually think that the ACLU does some valuable work. They're probably, on balance, a force for good. But the ratio of valuable to pernicious work has been dropping over the last two decades or so, and parity is rapidly approaching.
<< Home
