What impact do you think Justice Kennedy's retirement is likely to have on the various gun bans & gun control initiatives that are currently in place & likely to arise in the future? "Goodbye Justice Kennedy And Goodbye Gun Control" https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opinion-segall-kennedy-gun-control_us_5b33fc4ee4b0cb56051ec177 EXCERPT " What this likely means is that we can expect the Supreme Court to start reviewing a few of the more important gun control cases now percolating in the lower courts. Whether the issue is the validity of bans on so-called assault rifles, the length of waiting periods before people can buy guns or requirements for people to receive concealed-carry permits, our nation’s highest court may well start imposing its will on the gun measures of all 50 states and many cities and towns. Kennedy’s uncertain swing vote is simply no longer an obstacle." CONTINUED
It is far too early for any particular side in the discussion to be proclaiming either victory or defeat over this matter. There is no guarantee that the one who is appointed and confirmed to replace Anthony Kennedy will be another Niel Gorsuch. During her confirmation hearing, Sonia Sotomayor stated that the Heller ruling was settled law, and yet in the McDonald ruling argued that the precedent set by Heller should be overturned.
I agree that it's too early for 2nd Amendment supporters to relax but even though I disagree with much that Trump has done, I would far prefer for him to fill the vacancy than H. Clinton. I think that 2A advocates have been reluctant to appeal "Assault Weapons" ban cases to SCOTUS precisely because of Kennedy's unpredictability while Thomas has called the 2nd Amendment the Constitution's "orphan child".
SCOTUS refuses to hear such cases, we need to see many such regulations either changed or struck down entirely.
If the USA moves closer to following the Constitution, tyrannical ideas such as gun control will fall by the wayside. Good for the USA.
I agree. The thing about Supreme Court selections is that someone with a certain history of decisions on lesser courts does not necessarily continue with the same trends once they advance to being a member of the highest court in the nation. One can TRY for an ideological bent but one ends up getting what one gets. There is no guarantee unless you ignore qualifications and just go for the KNOWN ideologue approach. Ruth Bader Ginsburg being one of those.
You're right. Trump said he'd like to fill the vacancy as quickly as possible & would probably like to avoid a long, drawn out confirmation process. Additionally, he stated that he is looking at a woman for the job. Just as we do not know exactly what we will get as a replacement for Kennedy, we can be pretty sure that we will not get someone hostile to the 2nd Amendment as an appointee. As you intimated, whomever Trump appoints may currently supportive of 2A but their views may change over the years.
Absolutely. If Trump selects someone fundamentally qualified for the position -- even if he or she is noted to have a tendency to lean slightly rightward at times -- as opposed to a litmus test passing ideologue then one is submitting for consideration a true independent who is most likely to end up swinging between Left and Right on legal issues if there is not hard precedents to determine the outcome.
Wasn't Kennedy considered someone who ended up: "...swinging between Left and Right on legal issues ..."? I don't expect a hard, Right Wing ideologue to make it through the confirmation process & since Trump would like to fill the vacancy quickly, I think that most people expect Trump to chose a nominee that has only a slight Rightward leaning. Regardless of the nominee Trump selects, I'd be happier with that individual than one picked by HR Clinton as the 2nd Amendment has never before been faced with with such formidable foes as today.
Schumer suggests Garland. As if... We don’t need gun control. We need comprehensive nut control, as well as indoctrination on right vs wrong.
IF a Constitutional originalist is appointed, then its a major blow to the gun banners. The crime data and the past 40 years of relaxing gun controls and hugely increased gun ownership refute the gun banner claims, the banners lost the factual battle. The gun banners now resort to lies and emotional arguments to pass local gun control, but it is typically repealed through the legal process. But the legal aspects are still a little in doubt. With a solid pro-Constitution supreme court, then if the court accepts the various 2A related cases, the gun banners are doomed.
I agree. Although the focus of the current debate seems to be on the future of Roe v Wade, 2nd Amendment supporters seem to be justified in their optimism. I am curious as to the future of existing bans on semi auto rifles & 10+ capacity magazines in States like CA, IL etc. Since owners of those banned items are not turning them in & the local governments are not going door-to-door, I suspect that the owners are just waiting to see who Trump appoints. Meanwhile, the appearance of "Ghost guns"(1) in localities where "AWs" have been banned should come as a surprise to no one who realizes that gun bans only affect lawful citizens (1) "Task force takes ‘ghost guns’ off the streets in Hollywood" https://beverlypress.com/2018/07/task-force-takes-ghost-guns-off-the-streets-in-hollywood/ EXCERPT "This is a common trend ATF is seeing in So Cal amongst gangs. Criminals building their own guns, since they are prohibited from buying guns legally.”CONTINUED
