View Single Post
  #251  
Old 09-07-2019, 10:58 AM
Abatis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Upper Bucks County, PA.
Posts: 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
By a 5-4 vote along partisan lines and contrary to precedent.
What was contrary to precedent?

I know that was the party line coming from the liberal media and DailyKos and ThinkProgress etc. but have you ever read Breyer's dissent (which the other liberals signed on to)?

He said that the individual right interpretation is the starting point for understanding and applying the 2nd Amendment. He says the individual right interpretation was the holding that has been represented consistently in the Supreme Court's precedent and is represented in all three opinions issued that day and that the entire Court subscribes to the individual right interpretation and then, just to be clear, Breyer cites the majority opinion and Stevens' dissent as equal and also agreeing on this point.
"The Second Amendment says that: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” In interpreting and applying this Amendment, I take as a starting point the following four propositions, based on our precedent and today’s opinions, to which I believe the entire Court subscribes:
(1) The Amendment protects an “individual” right—i.e., one that is separately possessed, and may be separately enforced, by each person on whom it is conferred. See, e.g., ante, at 22 (opinion of the Court); ante, at 1 (Stevens, J., dissenting)."
So, what precedent was abridged?

No doubt Heller disrupted / abrogated lower federal court opinion that had went off the constitutional rails in 1942, (inserting the "state's right" and "militia right" perversions), but lower court opinion is not "precedential" for the Supreme Court.

Last edited by Abatis; 09-07-2019 at 11:03 AM.