January 24, 2006

Sixty Seven Years And Counting

TriggerFinger reports that SCOTUS has denied cert in Seegars.

Personally I think Parker is a better case for our side, but I don't kid myself that SCOTUS chose to ignore Seegars in the hopes of getting Parker. There has been much speculation (also look here) about the new make-up of the court & how it will effect us gun nuts, but in the end it simply comes down to this: the government will not give up its power unless compelled to do so. Courts are part of the government. We should not forget that. Sure, it's nice to think of them as beyond politics but they are just as vunerable to political persuasion as the other two branches (albeit a different form of politics & political persuasion).

If SCOTUS takes a direct 2nd amendment question I've little doubt they'd rule it's an individual Right, but subject to reasonable government restrictions. & how they'd define "reasonable" is much different than I ever would. But that's a big "if".

SCOTUS knows damn well that a lot of allegedly pro-gun groups will justify them not hearing 2nd amendment cases on the grounds that the court isn't "ready" to rule favorably. A few guys like me will call "bullshit" & spend an inordinate amount of time arguing with other pro-gunners about who is right.

So what I think will happen is SCOTUS will continue it's 6 decade plus streak of avoiding the issue altogether. Roberts, Alito, Scalia & Thomas may (key word: may - personally I don't trust anyone but Thomas) rule in our favor to some degree & they may be able to sway another judge to our side, but it's much safer to claim the court isn't "ready" than to risk alienating us by giving a weak or bad ruling or to risk alienating the rest of the government by giving us a strong decision in favor of the Right to Arms.

I could very well be mistaken but I don't see them breaking their streak. Cowardice is addictive & they've gotten quite good at it. I do hope I'm wrong. Hell, I'd like them to take any direct 2nd amendment question right now no matter what the "likely" ruling would be, just to clarify what we have to do to secure our Rights. But I'm not gonna hold my breath.

Posted by Publicola at January 24, 2006 02:41 AM | TrackBack

Matt updated that Roberts would have had to recuse himself from Seegars, due to his involvement with the case when he was on the DC circuit. That would leave only Thomas, Scalia, and Alito. Not good odds.

Posted by: Heartless Libertarian at January 24, 2006 10:11 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?