Skip to main content

View Diary: What gun control does the Second Amendment allow? (226 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I think it's more than one vote away (5+ / 0-)

    Because I think that the Court's respect of precedent is such -- especially on the liberal side -- that a shift in the Court's membership is not enough to overturn Heller, though they could erode it through application.

    Moreover, the whole point of the diary is that there's a lot of serious gun regulation which comfortably fits within Heller as-is.

    •  ? (0+ / 0-)

      didn't the dissent in McDonald say that Heller was wrong and should probably be overturned?

      It's been a hundred years, isn't it time we stopped blaming Captain Smith for sinking the Titanic?

      by happymisanthropy on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 01:06:23 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not quite (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cany, VClib, fuzzyguy

        They do think it was wrong, and use the debate over the history to resist incorporating the right to the states, but they don't indicate how strongly they respect it as precedent:

        The Court based its conclusions almost exclusively upon its reading of history. But the relevant history in Heller was far from clear: Four dissenting Justices disagreed with the majority’s historical analysis. And subsequent scholarly writing reveals why disputed history provides treacherous ground on which to build decisions written by judges who are not expert at history.

             Since Heller, historians, scholars, and judges have continued to express the view that the Court’s historical account was flawed. See, e.g., ....

    •  I've rec'd this comment even though (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JR

      I believe the gist of JR's comment is to point out how contentious a ruling Heller really was--and still is, particularly now.

      By that measure, despite the court's (not always consistent) respect for precedent, Heller, rather like Citizens United, strikes me as a ruling that is rather ripe for being overturned, either entirely or in part, with even a minimal shift in the Court. After all it took only 17 years for Bowers vs Hardwick to be overturned and the overturning was done by a court not far to the left of the Roberts court.

      The right case, argued the right way, might have very significant effects.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site