« Argument in Citizens United Case | Main | Remembering back a few years »
Numchuck case up for cert. conference
The 2d Circuit case on numchucks, which refused to incorporate the 2A against States, has had its petition for cert. set for consideration at the Sept. 29 conference, the same day the Court votes on whether to take the Chicago cases. I can't see it being taken alone. If it's taken with the Chicago cases, they'd certainly be consolidated, and since Justice Sotomayer was on the 2nd Circuit panel that ruled in the case, custom would be for her to recuse herself. No one has a clue as to her position here, but a recusal probably favors the pro-2A side.
Update--html corrected, thanks...
Update: tie means, lower court is affirmed, but the decision has no value as precedent. Tie went to the runner in these cases but that's it. In the next case, if the Court takes it, it can go either way without concern about having to overrule precedent, because this one only determined that there was a tie.
16 Comments | Leave a comment
Doesn't her recusal set up the possibility of a tie? What happens then?
www.examiner.com/x-5103-Wisconsin-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m9d10-Federal-court-decision-on-open-carry
"There was a Federal court decision in New Mexico dated September 8, 2009 (Matthew A. St. John v. David McColley and six unknown officers of the Alamogordo Department of Public Safety - Case Number 08-0994 BB/LAM)."
Which fededral court was that case heard? I would like to get the PDF file on that federal court decision! Is there a link to it?
nuNchuck: a bastardization of nunchaku.
and if you really want to see something incredible, look up the video of Bruce Lee playing ping pong!
PDF available at http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/attachment.php?id=7856
Ok karmically it's awesome she'd have to recuse herself from a case, ESPECIALLY a consolidated case with the nunchuck (yes, I called them nunchucks) case. Chicago's more important IMO then ninja sticks.
So:
She's an anti vote? Yes?
Replacing David Souter, another anti-vote?
Whoever Obama appointed, would be an anti-vote? Right?
And whoever he'd appoint would be anti if it wasn't Sotomayor, right?
And she might have to recuse herself? Right?
Then what the hell was with all the noise and a while ago with her being appointed and how it was supposedly going to sink us?
I do not believe she would recuse herself. Remember, the rules are different for Democrats.
Personally, I like the term "numb-chucks."
Yahoo!!. That is great . If they get consolidated that means a good discussion on arms and the extant the second amendment protects the right to bear "arms". I believe that arms means any weapon used for offense or defense either for civilian purposes or military. Thar is more expansive than most people are willing to accept.
Since Sotomayor was on the nunchuks getting, rid of a probable anti on SCOTUS is a big plus. I have to applaud the scheduling that had to take this into account.
IT seems to me that Scalia, Alito, Kennedy wants to consolidate the 2A before Obama's people can restrict it. That means a real good chance of incorporation like the 9th Circuit court.
Also the impetus of current admin and Customs going after knives means that knife and bladed arms are affected. Nunchucks and tasers for civilian can be protected.
While everyone realized Sotomayor was a case of no loss and no gain, defeating Sotomayor would have made room on the Court for a possible Pro 2A Justice.
Her appointment blocks that - and her confirmation means the next retirement will almost certainly pack the court with anti-gun justices.
Stranger
I wonder if we can close the tag?
Ooops.
I'm thinking it can't hurt and might help if she doesn't recuse herself. The position of the 4 justices of the Heller minority was absurd, so they will not have any respect for the actual law and will almost surely continue to do whatever they can to obstruct gun rights. Therefore our only chance is the 5 of the Heller majority. If they go our way, then we win. If one of them doesn't, then our only chance, as tiny as it is, is if Sotomayor surprises us and goes our way.
A further minor advantage is that even if we get the Heller majority, Sotomayor can possibly make it a 6 to 3 decision instead of just a 5 member majority.
David said:
No one has a clue as to her position here,
Uh ... I have a clue as to her position on the issue.
If it is anything other than a 5-3 win with Sotomayor recused, it will be a 4-1-3 "win" wit Sotomayor recused and Kennedy writing a weird concurrence that provides the victory in the case at hand while messing up precedent.
That is my real fear - a pyrric victory that leaves big questions too open for interpretation.
From the oral arguments of Heller, it seems Kennedy is strongly pro-gun. I doubt there is much to worry about from him.
There's a typo in the post html, I think. After "probably", there is the anchor closing tag, instead of the italic close tag.
It's causing all the other posts to be italicized, also.