« FEMA retracts gun ban | Main | Alito and guns »
Alioto said to be the pick
Word is that the nominee will be Judge Sam Alioto of the Third Circuit.
Over on the Volokh Conspiracy, David Bernstein points out an interesting fact: if he is confirmed (and he certainly sounds qualified) the Court will now have a majority of Roman Catholics (five) and two Jews. With the Catholic majority having been created by a very Protestant president. We've come a ways from the days when JFK had to worry about reassuring people that he wouldn't follow the Pope's commands.
(PS--the revolution is set for Guy Fawkes Day, right after Benedict canonizes the martyr on the steps of the Capitol. I understand he'll then take back 15,000 Marines to reinforce his Swiss Guard, and so if any future dictator sneers "The Pope? How many division has the Pope?" he can reply "One more than the Premier has plenary indulgences.")
I'm not to surprised. Traditional catholicism bore great resemblance to the American legal system.
1) It's run by a hierarchy, which establishes rules and regulations. The rules stretch back for centuries. There are commentators and training for canon lawyers. There is lots of room for debate, and centuries in which to do it. Major doctrines were traditionally hammered out at church councils.
2) At the higher levels, there is something very close to stare decisis. The hierarchy can admit something is wrong (unless it is the Pope, speaking ex cathedra, which I think he last did in the 1870s, thus leaving lots of wiggle room) BUT it hates to do so. Thus earlier "precedent" is adjusted by distinguishing it, or narrowing it, or reinterpeting it. The doctrine in the 19th century was that people can only achieve salvation through the church. In the 20th (and before, internally) this came under major criticism. A saintly fellow like Gandhi cannot get into heaven? How about Moses, who was around before there was a catholic church? The solution was to reinterpret the rule. The rule only said "through" the church. So, okay, good people will get into heaven thru the RC church. We never said they had to *belong* to the church to do so.
3 Comments
From
http://www.chequer-board.net/section/polisci
In United States v. Rybar, Judge Alito wrote a
blistering dissent from the majority opinion which
held that, notwithstanding United States v. Lopez,
Congress had the power to use the Interstate Commerce
power to prohibit the mere possession of machine guns
manufactured after May 1986, even though Congress had
made no findings about the effect of such machine guns
on interstate commerce. Judge Alito's dissent did not
address the majority's assertion that Rybar had no
Second Amendment rights because Rybar was not a member
of the militia.
Neither case clearly shows Judges Luttig or Alito to
support or oppose the Standard Model of the Second
Amendment. However, I believe that both opinions
suggest that judges Luttig and Alito are, at the
least, not hostile to the Second Amendment. Moreover,
a generous reading of the Fourteenth Amendment, and a
willingness to take Lopez seriously are in themselves
good signs for persons who support judicial
enforcement of the right to keep and bear arms.
A willingness to take Lopez seriously is a very good sign. And anyone that argues for fewer restrictions on machine guns is not very likely to sneer at the 2nd Am. for policy reasons...and I believe policy is what drives all/most opposition to the 2nd Am.
C.A.G.
So, is Alioto friendly to the RKBA, or just neutral? I have not seen anything mentioned about his RKAB philosophy.