Here’s a series of 4 articles by a law professor and a constitutional rights attorney, focusing on how the current court can contribute to restoring the Constitution. The last one deals with the Second Amendment, pretty interesting. They show how the Court after the Heller ruling has let the states and the lower courts run amok, doing whatever they want. As a resident of WA state, which just passed the I-1639 ‘gun control’ law (overview, full text version), I could not agree more. Now that they have all 9 seats filled and a majority of justices that support a constitutional philosophy, they need to take some 2A cases, clarify the meaning of Heller, and place clearer boundaries on how the states can apply it. And it’s plausible to think that the court will do that. The authors argue for restoring the 2A as a first-class constitutional right, with the notion that just like the First Amendment, it was based on a pre-constitutional natural right. So they see the 2A as deserving the same level of prioritization by the Court, protection from government infringement, and clarification, as the First.
— John Yoo is the Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law at the University of California, Berkeley, a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, and a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. James C. Phillips is an attorney in private practice and a non-resident fellow at Stanford Law School’s Constitutional Law Center.
There are a lot of cases that will have to be heard, and I don’t want to wait too long. If Trump looses and Thomas goes hunting at a DNC operatives ranch, we will lose all kinds of rights. The left has shown that they can look us in the eye and agree with the 2A, Heller and McDonald and approve 7 round mags, and an outlawing of semi autos. The first thing is that the lower courts need to be told that strict scrutiny is the correct way to evaluate 2A claims.
We don’t have time. The left is fine with passing huge progressive court wins in one fell swoop. Conservatives move step by step- and those take time. Plus, we need the laws at least held up by injunction. Once in place the gun grabbers will have no problem violating court orders and leaving unconstitutional laws on the books.
Some on the left have decided the 1st Amendment is just as “problematic,” along with the 5th. The 4th has been ignored in many ways for nearly 20 years now by lawmakers and administrations from both parties.
It’s hard to believe the author is from UC Berkeley. I really do hope the Roberts court solidifies 2a. That said, it would all be a moot point if immigration/wall is not tackled. We will have far too many completely ignorant of American history voting, I could see us reaching a point where the 2nd amendment is simply repealed after being upheld due to “changing demographics” (you could also read that as a slow moving silent invasion).
I assume you’re talking about illegals voting. The folks I’ve met who have actually passed the civics and history exam to become naturalized citizens know more about American history and govt than most of the college students I’ve interacted with (which is a lot, as I taught at the university level up until a few years ago).
The compete ignorance of US history and civics among American citizens is appalling, and leaves them open to manipulation by opportunistic politicians and the media. I’d argue that is both a greater threat to the health of our Republic and also one that is more difficult to correct.
Your example is anectodal, the numbers don’t jive with your personal experience. My wife and her family fled communism in Cuba, just because she is staunchly conservative does not mean she is representative of the majority of immigrants to this country, which are largely from Latin America, under educated and dependent on government subsidies, leading them to voting Democrat 2 to 1. If these people were voting Republican I can assure you the Democrats would have built a wall years ago.
You seem to be confusing immigrants with naturalized citizens. The former, the vast majority of the people described by the bolded statement above, cannot legally vote, even if they are among those who are here legally. Aliens have been prohibited from voting in federal elections since 1996, and in state elections since 1926 when Arkansas was the last state to outlaw non-citizen voting in state wide elections. The only exceptions are the few places like San Francisco and some localities in Maryland that allow aliens to vote in local elections.
If they are voting it needs to be addressed though the election process (i.e. locking up those who are facilitating the fraud).
I’m a little baffled at the insistence on conflating naturalized citizens, legal immigrants, and illegal immigrants.
While immigrants voting democrat may be an issue in California, it is also overrun with Caucasian liberals as well. However, this could all be cured if even 50% of the self described conservatives would have gotten off their ass and voted.
THIS. Sixty percent of Washington State sat on their thumbs and let twenty-four percent ram a Bloomberg Christmas List up our collective ass over the vocal opposition of the remaining sixteen percent.
If you don’t vote Pro-Gun and make sure to do so at every opportunity, YOU ARE THE PROBLEM.
That sounds nice in theory, but they are voting to strip away your rights, strip away the country as founded and voting for unsustainable debt which is going to lead to the “America, you know” to being an America you don’t know. Immigration is fine if it were controlled, people allowed to assimilate and we were allowing people in that were not heavily dependent on the government, at least not for any sustained length of time. The liberal elites are not the problem, these assholes exist everywhere and the only reason they have the power they do is because of a large underclass (which they want and need to be sustained).
