If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
If you are having difficulty logging in, please REFRESH the page and clear your browser cache and try again.
If you still can't get logged in, please try using Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome, Firefox, Opera, or Safari to login. Also be sure you are using the latest version of your browser. Internet Explorer has not been updated in over seven years and will no longer work with the Forum software. Thanks
After reading the Rahimi oral argument transcript and having a better understanding of the posture, I'd say the Court upholds the Federal law, probably in the neighborhood of 7-2 or 8-1. And I'd expect some concurrences to spell out where issues are in the future.
Yeah I saw a couple articles discussing it and was surprised that most of the justices were pretty sour on Rahimi's case. Here's one
Yeah, it was a facial challenge, not an as-applied or due process challenge or anything like that. It a much better posture for those arguing in favor of the law.
Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]? Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.
I only very quickly skimmed part of the transcript but Alito asked Rahimi's lawyer if it would be constitutional to take away guns from a man who routinely waved them around, pointed them at his family, threatened to kill them, etc? The lawyer said yeah, sure, and the obvious follow up is so why's it unconstitutional to do it to your client?
At the end of Progalcar's argument -- where they go around and ask the Justices if they have anything further, there's an exchange with Gorsuch. It's not long, but it's very informative, IMO.
Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]? Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.
Yeah if I had to guess, Thomas dissents, Alito maybe joins with half the dissent but definitely not all of it (unless it's very brief), and the others are in some sort of majority opinion-concurrence.
But I could see even Alito partly joining the majority.
The concurrences will be a lot of "this is not what we're saying is ok" and "we're only saying this facial challenge to this statute is no bueno" -- stuff like that.
Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]? Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.
The concurrences will be a lot of "this is not what we're saying is ok" and "we're only saying this facial challenge to this statute is no bueno" -- stuff like that.
Right, yeah, I wouldn't expect any earth-moving decision in any direction.
I didn't know as much about the background as I thought I did. It seems like perhaps gun rights activists rushed this up the ladder too fast and should've fought more in state court first, maybe?
They'd have been better-served to have a set of facts where the order was issued ex parte. The record was pretty thin on the underlying domestic issues, but it was a settlement with the DA where the dude agreed to the order and to the underlying facts.
Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]? Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.
So am I correctly interpreting that the challenge to the gun law was retardedly over ambitious when they could have easily challenged it on the basis of due process?
Last night was almost entirely good for Dems but it's meaningless for 2024.
* Wins on both Ohio issues
* Won open PA Supreme Court seat to maintain a 5-2 majority
* Held onto the Virginia Senate and flipped the Virginia House
* Erased NJ Republican gains in the NJ Legislature
* Obliterated some MAGA chud trying to become Indianapolis's mayor
* Andy Beshear reelected
Few Positives for R's
* Not even Elvis can beat an R in Mississippi
* Manchester, NH mayor's race
As usual, the MAGA social media influencers say every race they lost last night was rigged.
The R's better get their collective sheet together on abortion in 2024...it's a fucking losing issue politically. To me it is a heart issue...I'm opposed to it after x number of weeks (I'm in favor of 15 weeks) but we need to appeal to the hearts of women...not politically...they have spoken...and they reject the single digit weeks ban...it's a fucking loser.
Tweet
Comment