Popular Posts

Monday, April 20, 2009

US Ninth Circuit Court Affirms 2nd Amendement against State and Local Gov.

The Second Amendment Foundation today applauded the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco for ruling that the Second Amendment is incorporated against the states and local governments.

The majority opinion was written by Judge Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain, with a concurring opinion from Judge Ronald M. Gould, who wrote, "The right to bear arms is a bulwark against external invasion...That we have a lawfully armed populace adds a measure of security for all of us and makes it less likely that a band of terrorists could make headway in an attack on any community before more professional forces arrived."

Although the court found against the plaintiffs in the case of Nordyke v. King - Russell and Sallie Nordyke, operators of a gun show in Alameda County, CA - the court acknowledged that its earlier position that the Second Amendment protected only a collective right of states has been overruled by the Supreme Court's 2008 historic ruling in District of Columbia v. Dick Anthony Heller. That was the case in which the high court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual civil right to keep and bear arms.

Posted by at

4 comments:

  1. Slough DudeApril 20, 2009 at 7:57 PM

    Wow! Judges who actually know and appreciate what the Constitution says!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Kimberly WilsonApril 21, 2009 at 9:34 AM

    It was how they interpreted the US Constitution. Twenty years from now it may be interpreted differently.

    ReplyDelete
  3. canice mApril 21, 2009 at 7:05 PM

    I hope for all our sakes that you are wrong about this....the day the court rules any part of the consitution says something different than what it says, then the USA I grew up in is over, fait accompli. Just because a right exists doesn't mean its compulsory for you as an individual to practice. If you dont want to exercise your freedom of religion, speech, assembly, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure of your property, freedom from having the government put troops in your house and kick you out, then go ahead, throw up your hands and say I surrender my rights, I am no longer a citizen of the republic, I am a subject...OH,, wait, thats WHY we have a Bill of Rights, isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Kimberly WilsonApril 21, 2009 at 7:43 PM

    That is how it works. The Court's job is to interpret the meanings of the words. It makes the document a living document that can continue to serve the people's needs even in an evolving world. This has been ongoing since the inception of the Constitution and the government.

    What we need to be concern with is when people come into power such as one George W Bush who thought he had the right to interpret the words, or even to discard whole sections of the Constitution to suit his purpose. It is why the Court is comprised of nine men and women and who serve for life so that it removes them from being dictated by any current power holder.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)