dagblog - Comments for "SCOTUS Appears Unlikely to Reverse Gun Convictions, heeding Alito's warning"

A state full of 18-20-year

artappraiser — Thu, 06 May 2021 22:54:03 +0000

In reply to SCOTUS Appears Unlikely to Reverse Gun Convictions, heeding Alito's warning

A state full of 18-20-year-olds awaits learning the extent to which California intends to infringe their right to armed self-defense.https://t.co/IbFhhkcZHc
— reason (@reason) May 6, 2021

ACLU headed to argue in front

artappraiser — Tue, 27 Apr 2021 20:20:30 +0000

In reply to SCOTUS Appears Unlikely to Reverse Gun Convictions, heeding Alito's warning

ACLU headed to argue in front of the Supremes tomorrow:

Giving schools the power to police students’ speech outside of school with the same authority they do inside would have chilling effects on free speech.

We’re going to the Supreme Court tomorrow to defend the free speech rights of young people everywhere.https://t.co/sD7Y3uG5j7
— ACLU (@ACLU) April 27, 2021

Hill rioters & their judges

PeraclesPlease — Tue, 27 Apr 2021 04:22:49 +0000

In reply to SCOTUS Appears Unlikely to Reverse Gun Convictions, heeding Alito's warning

Hill rioters & their judges

Since we're talking about FISA today, I did a piece on how over 60 of the Jan 6 cases will be adjudicated by current or former FISA judges. With Contreras' ascension next month ALL presiding judges at one or another time. https://t.co/NMZsILuqJN
— emptywheel (@emptywheel) April 26, 2021

Supreme Court to hear major

artappraiser — Mon, 26 Apr 2021 17:36:51 +0000

In reply to SCOTUS Appears Unlikely to Reverse Gun Convictions, heeding Alito's warning

Supreme Court to hear major new gun-control case next term on carrying weapons outside the home

by Robert Barnes @ WashingtonPost.com, April 26, 2021 at 12:37 p.m. EDT

The Supreme Court announced Monday it will hear a major new gun-control case next term, accepting a National Rifle Association-backed challenge that asks the court to declare there is a constitutional right to carry a weapon outside the home.

The court will hear the challenge to a century-old New York gun-control law in the term that begins in October. It is considering a law that requires those who seek a permit to carry a concealed weapon to show a special need for self-defense. It is similar to laws in Maryland, Massachusetts and elsewhere that the court in the past has declined to review.

But the court’s new conservative majority has signaled it is more receptive to Second Amendment challenges. Several justices have said they are anxious to explore gun rights first acknowledged by the court in 2008, when it ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that individuals have the right to gun ownership for self-defense in their homes.

The decision to accept the case comes as the nation reels from a series of mass shootings. President Biden has advocated new measures and a strengthening of gun-control laws, and his administration will surely argue against weakening existing provisions.

In its brief to the court, the NRA-affiliated New York State Rifle & Pistol Association said that “perhaps the single most important unresolved Second Amendment question” since the court found an individual right to gun ownership “is whether the Second Amendment secures the individual right to bear arms for self-defense where confrontations often occur: outside the home.” [....]

So saying young teens shouldn

PeraclesPlease — Fri, 23 Apr 2021 03:32:54 +0000

In reply to BREAKING: In 6-3 decision,

So saying young teens shouldn't be saddled with raising another human for the rest of their lives as a consequence of youthful horniness is inconsistent with saying they shouldn't be completely saddled with the results of their awful acts of violence for the rest of their lives?

BREAKING: In 6-3 decision,

artappraiser — Fri, 23 Apr 2021 03:10:12 +0000

In reply to SCOTUS Appears Unlikely to Reverse Gun Convictions, heeding Alito's warning

BREAKING: In 6-3 decision, SCOTUS declines to further limit the ability of states to sentence juveniles to life without parole. The court upholds the sentence of a Mississippi man who killed his grandfather when he was 15; says sentencing procedure did not violate 8th Amendment.
— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) April 22, 2021

https://t.co/JLcS4qxDUS
— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) April 22, 2021

Justice Kavanaugh wrote the 6-3 opinion. Justice Thomas wrote separately concurring in the judgment. pic.twitter.com/P65mC41Tgj
— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) April 22, 2021

From Justice Sotomayor's dissent (joined by Justices Breyer and Kagan). pic.twitter.com/CSwPIofNRB
— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) April 22, 2021

Kavanaugh goes out of his way to note that the ruling should not be read as the court's agreement with the life sentence imposed here. Just that the sentencing procedure that was used complied with the Supreme Court's precedents.
— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) April 22, 2021

“It is curious how this Court’s view of the maturity of minors ebbs and flows."

Clarence Thomas questioned why teenagers should have an absolute right to abortion but can't be held fully responsible for homicide.https://t.co/qReycG2TcH
— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) April 23, 2021