Sipsey Street Irregulars: Why Heller Is the New Roe v. Wade

Thursday, February 18, 2016

Why Heller Is the New Roe v. Wade

Justice Scalia’s decision on gun rights will be the one that conservatives care about most.

Sen. Ted Cruz is obnoxious. Sen. Marco Rubio is nice. That’s why so many Republican politicians, donors, and party leaders want the senator from Florida, not the senator from Texas, to be the Republican nominee for president. They think Rubio would attract more voters than Cruz in a general election, and polls suggest they’re right. But the polls and pols miss an important factor: Tactically, Cruz is smarter than Rubio. That difference is becoming clearer as the candidates grapple with the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. . .

It’s possible that Rubio will end up as the Republican nominee. But if he does, it will be on the strength of his charm, not his acumen. To win the general election, Rubio would need to think more like Cruz, choosing issues that fit the moment and serve his candidacy. When it comes to the Supreme Court, that issue isn’t marriage. It’s guns.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...: Trump Vows to Defund Planned Parenthood, Overturn Roe

Trump also said that Roe v. Wade “was wrongly decided” and that he would appoint “constitutionalist judges.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/18/trump-vows-defund-planned-parenthood-overturn-roe/; February 18, 2016 at 1:39 PM
Anonymous said...: I submit to all 3%ers this,
McDonald, specifically Justice Thomas absolute obliteration of the contrived con that is "due process incorporation" is FAR more valuable and meaningful than Heller.
Justice Thomas exposed the whole concocted structure built trying to skirt admitting that, ummm, welll ahhhhh, yeah, that whole "the Constitution only applies to the federal government" precedent was bovine excrement from the get go and the 14th itself was an attempt to put the creative lawyering to bed once and for all.

Do not be fooled into focusing on Heller, which is properly owed its due, because saying one has a right, even going so far as to explain it and debunk the talking points against it, is ONE thing BUT the APPLICATION of it, it being HELD as ENFORCEABLE is quite another.

A right does you no good if you cannot apply it, enforce it, exercise it.
See what I am saying?

I like to put it this way, and do frequently -
Heller is the straight left jab, stiff jab, to the jaw, that pushed the head back a bit, but McDonald (Again, especially Thomas' Takedown itself) is the booming right hook that together knock out almost all modern day gun control.

Itis a shame the NRA didn't just STFU and witness a full PandI incorporation to come to pass to force the inevitable implosion of incorporation doctrine itself - and commerce clause "slaughtering" as a part of it, but the NRA action there at least proves where that organization TRULY stands, err bows. Well, for those who understand what is really going on anyway........; February 18, 2016 at 6:21 PM
Chiu ChunLing said...: I'm not leaving it to the Supreme Court to say whether or not the Second Amendment means what it says. That's not their decision. It never was, under the Constitution.

I'm an armed member of the populace. And I'll kill anyone that tries to disarm me.

I don't need the Supreme Court's permission for that.; February 19, 2016 at 10:59 AM
NavyJack said...: Heller vs DC has already been targeted. The 4th circuit appeals decision on the Maryland AWB will be the case used to "undo" the "in common use" provision in the Heller ruling. The lower court will accept the "strict scrutiny" guidance forced by the 4th circuit appeals panel only as it applies to the BOR (2nd/14th Amendments). The lower court will challenge "strict scrutiny" as it applies to Heller. This case will then go to the full 4th circuit appeals court and then onto the US Supreme Court AFTER the POTUS gets his new judge. McDonald FULLY relies on Heller. Once Heller is gone, McDonald follows.; February 21, 2016 at 8:12 AM
Anonymous said...: McDonald can't rely on heller, McDonald applies Heller. Fair enough, if Heller is gone there would be nothing to apply, but that is beyond ridiculous.

SCOTUS agreed - The Second amendment is no different. The stage is already stuck - that ain't changing...the question though is WHICH WAY does it stick? Are bible carry permits or does the right prohibit permits? Poops that's already addressed too...

The enumeration of a right TAKES OUT OF THE HANDS OF GOVERNMENT,Even the third branch, the power to decide on a case by case basis whether a right is really worth insisting upon.

You see, there is no way to undo what has been done. Not with Heller at least not for quite a few generations.

Put that with the failed attempt to create a new level of scrutiny in lower courts and it's done. This is why we witnessed both the grabbing of in common use and talk of outright repeal of the second. They are finally realizing Heller and McDonald actually hold.

There is no escape but it is a shame we missed out on a full and honest p and I...but it may yet come. We shall see. Regardless, prepare for the answer...I fear it will be bible carry permits. Maybe THEN people will finally STAND UP and FIGHT BACK!; February 24, 2016 at 2:13 AM

"Progress made under the shadow of the policeman's club is false progress."

I believe that liberty is the only genuinely valuable thing that men have invented, at least in the field of government, in a thousand years. I believe that it is better to be free than to be not free, even when the former is dangerous and the latter safe. I believe that the finest qualities of man can flourish only in free air – that progress made under the shadow of the policeman's club is false progress, and of no permanent value. I believe that any man who takes the liberty of another into his keeping is bound to become a tyrant, and that any man who yields up his liberty, in however slight the measure, is bound to become a slave. -- H.L. Mencken

"The Fate of Unborn Millions. . ."

"The time is now near at hand which must probably determine, whether Americans are to be, Freemen, or Slaves; whether they are to have any property they can call their own; whether their Houses, and Farms, are to be pillaged and destroyed, and they consigned to a State of Wretchedness from which no human efforts will probably deliver them. The fate of unborn Millions will now depend, under God, on the Courage and Conduct of this army-Our cruel and unrelenting Enemy leaves us no choice but a brave resistance, or the most abject submission; that is all we can expect-We have therefore to resolve to conquer or die." -- George Washington to his troops before the Battle of Long Island.

"We will not go gently . . ."

This is no small thing, to restore a republic after it has fallen into corruption. I have studied history for years and I cannot recall it ever happening. It may be that our task is impossible. Yet, if we do not try then how will we know it can't be done? And if we do not try, it most certainly won't be done. The Founders' Republic, and the larger war for western civilization, will be lost.

But I tell you this: We will not go gently into that bloody collectivist good night. Indeed, we will make with our defiance such a sound as ALL history from that day forward will be forced to note, even if they despise us in the writing of it.

And when we are gone, the scattered, free survivors hiding in the ruins of our once-great republic will sing of our deeds in forbidden songs, tending the flickering flame of individual liberty until it bursts forth again, as it must, generations later. We will live forever, like the Spartans at Thermopylae, in sacred memory.

-- Mike Vanderboegh, The Lessons of Mumbai:Death Cults, the "Socialism of Imbeciles" and Refusing to Submit, 1 December 2008

"A common language of resistance . . ."

"Colonial rebellions throughout the modern world have been acts of shared political imagination. Unless unhappy people develop the capacity to trust other unhappy people, protest remains a local affair easily silenced by traditional authority. Usually, however, a moment arrives when large numbers of men and women realize for the first time that they enjoy the support of strangers, ordinary people much like themselves who happen to live in distant places and whom under normal circumstances they would never meet. It is an intoxicating discovery. A common language of resistance suddenly opens to those who are most vulnerable to painful retribution the possibility of creating a new community. As the conviction of solidarity grows, parochial issues and aspirations merge imperceptibly with a compelling national agenda which only a short time before may have been the dream of only a few. For many Americans colonists this moment occurred late in the spring of 1774." -- T.H. Breen, The Marketplace of Revolution: How Consumer Politics Shaped American Independence, Oxford University Press, 2004, p.1.

Sipsey Street Irregulars

Thursday, February 18, 2016

Why Heller Is the New Roe v. Wade

5 comments:

Blog Archive

Followers