In one of the great activist decisions in the history of the court, the right wing majority has abandoned hundreds of years of precedent to declare that Americans have an individual — as opposed to collective — right to own firearms.
I’m no anti-gun nut, but for self-proclaimed “originalists” and “strict-constructionists” to adopt this undeniably modern reading of the constitution is just intellectually bankrupt.
Maybe they’re just bitter and clingy.
PS: Does anyone else remember how the hallmark of the Supreme Court of Chief Justice Roberts was going to be restraint — deciding cases on the narrowest points of contention, so as to avoid precisely this kind of upheaval in the understanding of basic constitutional law?
Surely a decision could have been crafted on this case such that the D.C. law would have been overturned for violating the collective rights of the citizens of the District to protect themselves with arms, punting on the political football as to whether an individual right is actually conferred by the framer’s torturous wording.
Given that the ambiguity of the 2nd Amendment has served us for two centuries, to suddenly imbue it with a clarity that is simply not found in the letter of its words seems the exact opposite of conservative jurisprudence. The Scalia decision seems to delight in having opened up a can of worms — setting up myriad challenges of established law on the local, state, and national level. Fuck precedent. Let’s have some fun.
But that went right out the window today