|
|
Convictions: Slate's blog on legal issues
-
So what exactly is the scope of the "gun right" discovered by Justice Scalia in Heller? And why aren't the John McCain and Barack Obama unlikely to say much about it? Has Justice Scalia become a natural law originalist? Be patient, the Justices will instruct us in these matters of liberty or is that a denial of liberty, itself? Read More...
-
"Wrong, All Wrong," said Edmund Randolph about the handiwork of John Marshall in Marbury, but "no man in the country knows why or wherefore." The originalist mistake of Heller is much more patent, and it is sad to think that a method of interpretation so well advocated by Justice Scalia should be wounded by his own hand. Read More...
-
It is the final week of the Court term, and as is typical, one of the most contentious cases -- D.C. v. Heller -- awaits disposition. Will originalism matter? Read More...
-
Jack is right to point out that the privileges or immunities clause of the 14th amendment was indeed, as Senator Howard at the time explained, intended to incorporate Corfield's partial listing of natural rights as well as the Bill of Rights, including Read More...
-
What might the Supreme Court be writing regarding the DC handgun ban? If the oral argument is any guide, and hopefully it will not be, the Court is invalidating the DC handgun ban, when an originalist understanding would reach the exact opposite result. Read More...
-
Jack's got it right when he writes: " Don't assume that living constitutionalism only swings to the left. It doesn't." And that's a lesson that extends beyond the question of whether today, 217 years after ratification, the 2d Amendment to the U.S. Constitution Read More...
-
This new Gallup poll suggests that if, as Mr. Dooley says, the Supreme Court follows the election returns (or more correctly, national public opinion) it will hold that there is an individual right to keep and bear arms unconnected with militia service, Read More...
-
Over at Obsidian Wings , my friend Publius [ not his real name -- a.w. ] suggests that states should enjoy flexibility under the Second Amendment to calibrate gun-control regulations in light of the varying needs of different cities and towns: If your Read More...
-
So here's where I think our arguments are passing in the ether, Jack. First, I've always understood there to be an at least doctrinal (perish the thought) distinction between "fundamental rights" and "everything in the Bill of Rights." (So when, for example, Read More...
-
Without natural law in the backdrop, the Second Amendment does not guarantee a right of individual self-defense. If the Court is on the verge of saying otherwise, is it prepared to revive natural law? If not, get thee to the legislature. Read More...
-
Is the Roberts Court about law or politics? The DC gun case gives the Justices a unique opportunity to try out an internal procedure that might silence those who insist that Supreme Court judgment consists of little more than 4 conservatives arrayed against 4 liberals moderated by Justice Kennedy's perspective du jour. Read More...
-
Akhil Amar’s analysis of Heller is unlikely to persuade any justices doctrinally, but it captures the cultural point that will decide this case. According to Amar, the Second Amendment had to do with militias, so it doesn’t create an individual right. Read More...
-
[Doug Kmiec] Oh, Second Amendment, we hardly knew ye. The Second Amendment has two main parts: a preamble and an operative provision. The preamble: "a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state," is a statement of purpose. Read More...
| | S | M | T | W | T | F | S | | 28 | 29 | 30 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 1 | | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum What did you think of this article?
|
|
|