Ammo For Sale

« « Shooting 22 bullets and 5.56 shells out of a shotgun | Home | Gun Porn » »

SCOTUS doesn’t back up its own ruling

The supreme court refused to hear Jackson v. City and County of San Francisco. After Heller and McDonald, they don’t seem very willing to take on many more gun rights cases. It’s curious to me why that is. Pre-Heller, it was speculated that the court wouldn’t take gun cases because they weren’t convinced the decision would go the right way. But Sandy resigned. I wonder who the hold out is now?

9 Responses to “SCOTUS doesn’t back up its own ruling”

  1. Backwoods Engineer Says:

    Something is happening with the Supremes. It seems, post-McDonald, that they are “gun-shy” of taking any more 2nd Amendment cases. Almost as if someone had threatened them individually and severally. Things that make you go, “Hmmm…”

  2. Sebastian Says:

    The big revelation is that it’s not Scalia or Thomas refusing to take the cases. It would seem that Kennedy and/or Roberts don’t want to revisit the issue. My conservative view is that Roberts prefers to avoid controversy, and prefers cases where he can build broader consensuses.

    My more “out there” theory is that the FBI has digging up dirt on SCOTUS judges and the Administration is blackmailing them.

  3. emdfl Says:

    I ‘spect that your “out there” theory is closer to being there than your first thought.

  4. Adam Lawson Says:

    Roberts is a wuss, to use the legal parlance.

    Kennedy, Sotomayor, Kagan, Ginsburg, Breyer — five votes I don’t trust, with the last four being immediately troublesome.

    That really only leaves Scalia, Thomas, and Alito.

    I’d rather they punt down the road if at all possible.

    Of course, my tune’ll change if there’s a Dem picking the replacements for Ginsburg and Scalia. That’s almost enough to keep me up at night.

  5. nk Says:

    Roberts is the likeliest for the reasons Sebastian said. Kennedy was the most pro-RKBA in the Heller oral arguments. More than Scalia even.

  6. TriggerFinger Says:

    My bet is also on Roberts by reason of blackmail by parties unknown but presumably left-leaning. Lefty justices can’t know Roberts would play ball again and that it would look mighty suspicious if he outright reversed an earlier high profile case; and righty justices don’t want to risk it. Roberts can’t do the honorable thing and resign because Obama would appoint a replacement who wouldn’t need to be blackmailed. Stalemate until Obama leaves office at least.

  7. JTC Says:

    “The rebuff is a setback for gun-rights advocates, who have repeatedly tried and failed in recent years to get the high court to expand the protections under the Second Amendment.”

    Odd definition of “failed”. But consider the source…heh, that ‘splains that.

    Bloomie, aka Liars that Lie and the Lying Lies that Liars Lie about.

  8. JTC Says:

    Dang, forgot the link:

  9. Brian Says:

    After Roberts insane ruling on Obamacare, I don’t want him anywhere near gun rights till after 0 is out of office. If 0 doesn’t have blackmail material on Roberts, the justice is unreliable and incapable of logical thought.

Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.

Uncle Pays the Bills

Find Local
Gun Shops & Shooting Ranges