« May 2014 | Main | July 2014 »
June 2014
Here's a fundraiser worthy of attention
Right here. I would've contributed, but they've already taken the $5.61 donated and mailed it to the needy recipient.
Nice close of the 2013 Term
The 2013 Term is drawing to a close (I think some opinions are due to be announced Monday) and it seems to be ending quite nicely, with two opinions on Con law which are 9-0s (rare at the end of a Term, which is when all the bitterly contested 5-4s come down).
There's Riley v. California, a 9-0 on the Fourth Amendment (how long has it been since we've seen one of those?) Police may obtain a smartphone during a search incident to arrest, but cannot explore its contents -- texts, photos, videos -- without probable cause and a warrant. Alito's concurrence asks whether the power to search incident to arrest is truly limited to protecting officer safety,
And there's NLRB v. Canning, on the President's Recess Appointments Clause. Another 9-0. Five of the Justices take a narrower approach to the question, holding that clause gives the power to make interim appointments during any Senate "recess" (i.e., not just during gaps between formal "Sessions" or "Congresses") of sufficient length, but a three day gap is too brief, and a gap of up to ten days is questionable.
The other four Justices (Scalia, Roberts, Alito, and Thomas) take a view that I thought reasonable: the power is to fill "Vacancies that may happen" while the Senate is in recess. A vacancy that occurs before the recess does not "happen" during it. The purpose, in the days when Senate sessions were briefer than now, was to patch gaps that arise during a recess, not to fill posts where the Senate had the chance to act and refused to.
Permalink · General con law · Comments (3)
Prof. Nick Johnson on the right to arms
"Undermining Our Conversation About the Right to Arms." I esp. enjoy its ending:
"Meanwhile, and perversely, federal power is deemed to be nearly boundless. We recently heard top Senators and Representatives say that Congress unquestionably had the power to force people to buy health insurance--and if that, one wonders, why not the power to dictate flossing, broccoli-eating, and infinite other no doubt healthy mandates that are utterly corrosive of liberty. (Some find consolation in the Supreme Court's rationalization that the edict was really a tax.)
All of this turns our constitutional structure on its head. If we took the Constitution's creation of limited powers and affirmation of pre-existing rights seriously, the salient question about the individual right to arms would be this: Where in the enumerated federal powers is there anything close to the authority to infringe on the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense?
For those who would answer, "The Congress shall have Power To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes"--and notice how much more limited the clause seems when you read its actual language rather than just say "the commerce power"--we should apply the kind of stingy, skepticism that Stevens, Waldman, and others would erroneously apply to the "right of the people to keep and bear arms.""
Never bring a knife to a gunfight, part 2,391
Story here.
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (1)
Safety first: always be conscious of what is downrange
And the downrange is very long, when shooting a 105mm howitzer.
I have to wonder what type of arrangements they had, with houses three miles downrange, apparently on flat ground -- a .50 BMG will travel upwards of three miles, and a 172 gr. 30-06 around two miles, if I recall correctly.
L.A. Gangbangers head to Syria
The Assad regime is sunk, if these are their reinforcements.
They don't appear to have mastered either the offhand or the overhead firing stances.
Explanation of school blocking progun websites but not Brady and others
David Codrea has the scoop.
The school tried to blame the company making the blocking software, but the company says, no, it's a product of the school's chosen settings. The company recognizes sites that it has rated and classified by content, and sites that it has not gotten to. These are evaluated based on internet popularity -- more popular sites get first place in the priority for evaluation.
One of the categories evaluated is "politics/advocacy groups." The school chose to block these (I suppose that says something about how much they want their students exposed to the world and to diverse ideas in general). The default is to not block these. The school also chose to unblock unrated sites. The default is to block these, too much risk of malware and viruses.
Since sites are given priority for ratings based on popularity, what this amounts to is -- progun and conservative sites are very popular, and thus apt to be evaluated and tagged "policy/advocacy," while the antiguns sites are not very popular, and thus apt to be left without evaluation.
226th anniversary of the ratification of the Constitution
Consource reminds us that June 21st is the 226th anniversary of New Hampshire's ratification of the proposed US Constitution. NH gave the document the ninth vote required for it to take effect and bind all States that had already ratified -- it still remained to win over Virginia and NY, without whom the new agreement would lack the future nation's two most prosperous (and in the case of Virginia, the physically largest) States.
The New Hampshire ratification came with the provision:
"And as it is the opinion of this Convention, that certain amendments and alterations in the said Constitution would remove the fears and quiet the apprehensions of many of the good people of this state, and more effectually guard against an undue administration of the federal government, -- The Convention do therefore recommend that the following alterations and provisions be introduced in the said Constitution: --
. . . . .
XI. Congress shall make no laws touching religion, or to infringe the rights of conscience.
XII. Congress shall never disarm any citizen, unless such as are or have been in actual rebellion."
This gets boring after 10-20 years
Media jumps on Violence Policy Center's proclamation that certain States have high gun death rates.
In this article, it's Wyoming. "Study: Wyoming among highest for state gun death rates," using 2011 data.
Nevermind that that Wyoming was tied for the tenth lowest murder rate in the country, at 2.4, compared to New York at 3.5, New Jersey at 4.4, and California at 5.0 (ranked No. 1 by Brady Campaign).
Use of force in defense of property
An interesting piece, by Prof. Volokh.
Interesting. I'm sure it's coincidence.
High school blocks internet access to pro-gun, Republican, and conservative sites. Strangely, Moms Demand Action and similar sites were not blocked. I'm sure that's coincidence.
Don't worry, the government will protect you
"Man shoots intruder after his 911 call is transferred to voice mail".
Abramski loses on a 5-4
Opinion here.
Supreme Court end of Term crush
The Supreme Court reserves its most contentious cases, the type that generate vigorously disputed 5-4s. for the end of a Term. Right now, it has 17 cases to decide in 14 days. Among those is the firearms case of Abramski v. US. The Court's schedule calls for releases of opinions on each Monday this month, and also perhaps on Thursday, June 12.
Permalink · Supreme Court caselaw · Comments (0)
Supreme Court end of Term crush
The Supreme Court reserves its most contentious cases, the type that generate vigorously disputed 5-4s. for the end of a Term. Right now, it has 17 cases to decide in 14 days. Among those is the firearms case of Abramski v. US. The Court's schedule calls for releases of opinions on each Monday this month, and also perhaps on Thursday, June 12.
Permalink · Supreme Court caselaw · Comments (3)
NY justice
They caught the goon who is suspected of stabbing two little Brooklyn kids, one of whom died.
He's also suspected in another fatal stabbing, committed seven days after he got out of prison, and two days before he stabbed the girls. He was in prison for attempted murder -- for which he was sentenced to five years. Five years for attempted murder? Here, the presumptive sentence for that (a class two felony, and dangerous offense) would be 10.5 years, and the max 21 years.
This country is in the best of hands...
Chuck Schumer shows his expertise in constitutional law: ""I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what's being proposed here, he'd agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute."
Jefferson was actually out of country just then. He was minister to France from 1784 to 1789, returning just in time to be appointed Secretary of State and to engross the copies of the bill of rights which were sent to the States for ratification.
What is known about the Las Vegas murderers...
So far--
The male had a long rap sheet. Included were multiple arrests on drug charges, another felony conviction for criminal recklessness, battery, and violating conditions of release.
They did go to the Bundy ranch, where they were refused admission after the male admitted he was a convicted felon.
Six falsehoods being pushed by Bloomberg & Co.
The Daily Caller has an impressive list.
Hat tip to reader Jim K.
When does the NY Times care about restoring a felon's gun rights?
Ann Althouse has the answer: when it can be used to portray a GOP governor and possible presidential candidate in a bad light. The fellow in the story was convicted of aggravated assault after breaking a man's nose, and wants a pardon so that his gun rights will be restored. Funny that a few years ago the Times ran an article headlined "Felons Finding It Easy to Regain Gun Rights."
NRA, Bloomberg and Facebook
Stephen Wright has done done an interesting study. In terms of "likes," NRA has 10:1 advantage. In terms of increasing number of those, a 4:1 advantage. And in terms of age, NRA's following is clustered in the 25-44 age class, while Bloomberg's is in the 55+ age class.
What was that about "low information voters"?
Candidate for California Secretary of State withdraws after being indicted for trying to arm terrorists, still gets 287,000 votes. He got nearly 11% of the total, while the two winners got 29%. A very respectable showing!
Summary of "Operation Choke Point"
Bluegrass Bruce has a good summary of the effects of the Justice Department's program aimed, in part, at causing banks to sever relationships with lawful firearm dealers.
Bond v. US and the treaty power
An interesting case. The US entered into a treaty to prohibit the development, etc., of chemical weapons. Congress then enacted a statute prohibiting the possession or use of chemical weapons.
Mrs. Bond discovered her husband was having an affair, and dumped toxic chemicals around the other lady's house and car, which gave her a minor burn. Some overzealous Asst US Attorney prosecuted Bond for violating the anti-chemical weapon statute and she pled out, reserving the right to appeal.
The majority ducks the constitutional issue by holding that the statute can be construed so as to exclude what Bond did.
Three Justices concur in the result, while reaching the constitutional issues:
Justice Scalia argues that the power to "make" treaties, combined with the "necessary and proper clause" does not equal a power to execute treaties by penalizing conduct (unless the statute falls within some other grant of power to Congress). He replies to the objection that that would mean the US could enter a treaty without being able to carry it out with the observation that the Framers set up that way: the President and Senate can always make a treaty, but only the House, Senate, and often President can enact a law.
Justices Thomas and Alito concur in the result, on the grounds that the treaty power is properly limited to international affairs, not to regulation of purely domestic acts.
Alan Gura's blog
He has one up. His postings aren't too frequent, since he has an active practice, a family, and a life, which are disadvantages to blogging which I would like to share. But it's very interesting in terms of Supreme Court practice and inside notes on Heller and McDonald. Looks like he's set up to teach a course at Georgetown Law on strategic litigation.