Speaking of the supreme court punting
They’ve refused to hear Drake, the NJ may issue (as in no issue) case. Denied without an explanation. Odd, to me. But it’s apparently normal, though this time the court got snippy.
5 Responses to “Speaking of the supreme court punting”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
May 6th, 2014 at 12:14 am
The snippiness was for another unrelated case, not for the NJ case.
May 6th, 2014 at 1:59 am
My first thought when Heller came down was “fine we’ve got the firearms ownership is a right independent of militia membership. Now we’re gonna spend the next forty years arguing the exact definition of ‘infringed’.”
May 6th, 2014 at 1:01 pm
They can be snippy all they want. San Diego has to go to SCOTUS, or 90% of the Kalifornia VolksRepublik Anti-Carry Laws get tossed. And do you think the Uber-Libs will allow “Shall Issue” in Kali w/o fighting it Tooth and Nail? Stay Tuned.
May 6th, 2014 at 7:04 pm
I think they are trying to hold off until they can load the court… Just my opinion…
May 7th, 2014 at 9:27 am
I think that the SCOTUS is terrified that “shall not be infringed” can’t be spun into “needs more gov’t control.”
They are looking at the mountains of laws that will be struck down and saying….”Pass”…..