Looks like the transcript just came out. We’re sitting in a bar under the NRA-ILA Federal Affairs office in DC going over it. Chris Cox was kind enough to offer to print out copies for us, which we gladly accepted.
In a way, you’re all probably more informed than me being here in DC on the ground. Having only handheld PDAs, it’s rough.
Everyone I’ve spoken to is optimistic. While the Court seemed to quickly shut down the Privileges or Immunities route, they absolutely grilled into Feldman, the attorney for Chicago, who seemed to have great difficulty with his argument. I asked Dave Hardy as he came out of the court what he thought, and he said, “I think we have five votes.”
Let us hope. We still have a long road ahead, regardless.
Rob posted a most excellent Quote-of-the-Day:
“Justice Sotomayor, States may have grown accustomed to violating the rights of American citizens, but that does not bootstrap those violations into something that is constitutional”. – Alan Gura, Arguing before the Supreme Court on McDonald V. Chicago
Wow! I have to say it was a pleasure to meet and Rendezvous with him.
Reading the entire transcript. Seems the SC beat up Mr. Guru a little as well as Mr. Feldman. The transcript almost looks like Mr. Feldman is a stutterer. Mr.Clement was hardly questioned in his position.
Now to see what this gets us if passed. I was hoping for National Reciprocity by 2011. I don’t see it with the justices comments.
Anyone have a link to the transcript?
Scott:
http://supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/08-1521.pdf
Let me guess. Bullfeathers
Interesting the judges wanted what Gura thought could come out of invigorated P &I and he did not have an answer. So why should they open the can of worms if 2A can incorpoated under due process?
I like what the comment on Instapundit that Gura was a genius that P &I was so scary they ran to accept due process as incorporation.
I would have like P &I and have been thinking that it would open a big field to argue against the constant nanny statism by the states and federal government from seat belt laws to smoking restrictions to give a couple of examples. P &I would have strengthened parental rights.
But anyway we got incorporation and CA and Chicago is doomed to lose. It was slam dunk under due process. Clement did very well in his argument and in retrospect i am glad the NRA had him there to bolster that it has to be incorporated under due process.
I really liked the argument of differing Federal being more liberal than states that was fun.
The transcript was fun and Feldman got confused. Feldman’s argument was extremely weak.
Dannytheman Said: “I was hoping for National Reciprocity by 2011. I don’t see it with the justices comments.”
Huh? That’s something the Congress will pass … not the Supreme Court.
I counted all 9 justics as pro-incorporation. The degree of how strict an incorporation is alot different. I don’t see any justice on either side really agreeing with feldman…they seemed more interested in the level of scrutiny rather than if the second amendment was incorporated. Maybe Justice Breyer
Therein lies a concern I had as I was reading…that maybe in order to get a large majority, the opinion will be written in a way that is palatable to Sotomayor, Ginsburg, Souter, and Breyer. I’d rather have a good 5-4 than a weak 7-2. Given the criticism that the Roberts Court has come in for, especially since Heller, I worry that they’ll take this one as a chance to have a consensus opinion on a controversial issue.
Someone mentioned a thought, that Gura actually had a brilliant strategy: Push so hard on P&I that due process would be the rational, centrist way to go…
I don’t know if that was indeed his plan….whatever works is just fine with me, and if the cowards in the bathrobes need another reason to do away with the Slaughterhouse mess, they’ll find it.
If they don’t incorporate, then the Constitution just doesn’t mean anything, any more.
I heard a rumor that Petey Hamm choked on a Starbuck’s coffee bean and shat himself in the chambers.
“Dannytheman Said: “I was hoping for National Reciprocity by 2011. I don’t see it with the justices comments.â€
Huh? That’s something the Congress will pass … not the Supreme Court.”
I’m sorry, I was typing and thinking. I was thinking it would be easier for legislators to vote yes to reciprocity if all States we are level playing field. But with the SCOTUS mentioning “some regulations”. My thoughts were that this could be one of them.
Sorry to be out there.. It was a long 78 pages…