What is the Status of Peruta

[steve4102]

Is this a done deal or can it be taken up during another session?

 

[Al Norris]

There are rumors today that Justice Kennedy may retire.

Assuming this happens and Trump (successfully) appoints another constitutionalist, there is no guarantee that things will change.

Justice Ginsburg does not have long.

Even this is no guarantee. But assuming arguendo, this leaves only four constitutionalists (Thomas, Gorsach, and the two unknowns).

In watching the Court, I have noticed that Justice Alito does not hold a consistent view of the Constitution. The question is: Can we trust Justice Alito to rule in favor of a second amendment case? I would voice the opinion that, no we cannot, as the Justice does not hold a consistent position. I posit that Justice Alito will become the "Kennedy" and "O'Conner" of the day. In simpler terms, I expect to see Justice Alito to become the swing vote of the court.

This leaves C.J. Roberts. A true wildcard, inasmuch C.J. Roberts appears to side with whatever public opinion of the day seems to hold sway. This, in the name of keeping the Court relevant.

This mornings denial of cert has changed my mind. I am now in the same camp as Glenn. Federal action is now required to preserve the rights guaranteed in the second amendment.

 

[Tom Servo]

If I were the NRA - I would tell the progun party - that they become MORE proactive (cut screwing around with some other issues) and move progun stuff or we just might not campaign so hard for you.

That won't work in this climate, though. We have one party that gives wizened lip-service to the 2A and another that wants sweeping restrictions. There's no third option. In this situation, the NRA has no real choice but to side with the apathetic folks over the openly hostile ones.

 

[Gary L. Griffiths]

We have one party that gives wizened lip-service to the 2A and another that wants sweeping restrictions. There's no third option. In this situation, the NRA has no real choice but to side with the apathetic folks over the openly hostile ones.

Spot on. Without getting too far into the political arena, let me just say that we should support more pro-gun rights candidates in both party's primaries.

 

[tyme]

My take, and maybe I'm being wildly optimistic, is that the 4 conservatives got together and it might have gone like this....

This is going to hurt, but we can either vote for cert, perhaps with Kennedy still here to appease when it goes to decision, or... some of us will take the hit and not vote for cert, we wait for the next good case, and the rest of you can channel your inner comedians and write a scathing dissent against us traitors.

Alito and Roberts may not be constitutionalists on this issue, but do we really need that, or do we just need someone to the constitutionalist side of Kennedy? Anybody Trump would replace Kennedy or Ginsburg with probably be a substantial benefit 2A decisions, and is unlikely to hurt. We won't be getting a decision that it's okay to carry a bazooka in the financial district of San Francisco any time soon, but we certainly wouldn't with the current court composition either.

Of course, delay has its downsides as well. California and other places like it remain carry-restricted for the near future, and it's possible that by the time another case works its way up to the Court, there could be a President Kanye or whoever, several conservative justices could have fallen down elevator shafts or run their cars into trees or had fatal doses of polonium-210 mysteriously appear in their food, and there could be a liberal-dominated court.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...ent-issue-the-supreme-court-cant-avoid-215331

Here's an analysis of Peruta and the history/issues of modern 2nd Amend. cases. Discusses the conflict of state laws and constitutional issues. Suggests that SCOTUS will have to take this on sometime.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/13/bloomberg-gun-control-everytown-240486

A claim by Bloomberg that they are winning on the state level. Some truth to that as while there are positives in gun friendly states, many defeats or not passage of bills in gun friendly and unfriendly states.

Goes to the point that SCOTUS is not helpful in the foreseeable future despite previous article suggesting that SCOTUS will speak - and be careful about that.

The current paralysis of Washington, esp. since the gun 'friendly' part shows no real practical interest in gun rights (just talk) suggests the states are at risk.

 

[raimius]

I fear the more the gun community sides with one political party, the less influence we will have. If you "must" vote for that party, they have no incentive to work for you. For now, I think state battles and lower courts are where things are happening. It would be nice if the current Congress would do something positive, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[LeverGunFan]

I fear the more the gun community sides with one political party, the less influence we will have. If you "must" vote for that party, they have no incentive to work for you. For now, I think state battles and lower courts are where things are happening. It would be nice if the current Congress would do something positive, but I'm not holding my breath.

In many states there is effectively only one party - Republicans control most of the local and state offices. One of the trends of the past decade is the decline in the number of offices held by Democrats locally, to the point where there are fewer Democrat candidates being developed. The remaining Democrats are from reliable blue states and they are very much anti gun rights. As an indicator of the number of available candidates for each party, just look at the participation in the presidential primaries. The Republicans had about a dozen participants including several young candidates, but the Democrats had only two and they were 69 and 75 on election day.

 

[Frank Ettin]

Peruta is done. So is this thread.