Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.8
Site Design by Sekimori

« Photos from the Supreme Court yesterday | Main | Cardozo Law Rev. symposium on Heller & McDonald »

Bob Cottrol on McDonald

Posted by David Hardy · 29 June 2010 06:29 PM

at SCOTUSBlog. Very much to the point. A sample:

The opinions in McDonald are rich in ironies. We have conservative justices authoring opinions which squarely confront the tragic legacy of race and its impact on American Constitutional history, while we have liberal justices wanting to largely skip over that history. We have on the other hand liberal justices pleading for states’ rights and federalism while conservative justices make the case for the soundness of incorporating the Bill of Rights as a matter of original intent. The Court got it right in McDonald but how it came to do so will fascinate students and commentators for some time to come.

· Chicago gun case

3 Comments | Leave a comment

John | June 29, 2010 7:17 PM | Reply

And all to avoid resuscitating the privileges and immunities clause.

Jim | June 29, 2010 8:26 PM | Reply

I think the conservative justices simply weighed the potential havoc of applying PI after all this time against the harm of applying selective incorporation to the 2nd. They know full well due process is a sham but they also know its been this way forever, so they were realists.

The liberals, on the other hand, still want to just make stuff up as they went along, which is how SCOTUS got into that mess to begin with. By conservative justices making stuff up.

Harry Schell | June 30, 2010 10:33 AM | Reply

I echo someone smarter but on the last 4-5 SCOTUS decisions, this one included, it is pretty clear who values individual rights and who doesn't.

"Liberals" just have evolved, I guess.

Leave a comment