Re: Silveira DENIED Certiorari

"Jake T" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Morton Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > "Jake T" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > "Sam Kersh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 21:30:07 GMT, "Morton Davis"
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >"Mike Haas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> message
> > > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > >> The United States Supreme Court announced this morning
> > > that it has DENIED
> > > > >> the Silveira vs. Lockyer Petition for Certiorari. The
> > > Supreme Court will
> > > > >not
> > > > >> hear the case.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> We should all be thankful for this. For reasons set
> out by
> > > long-respected
> > > > >> RKBA scholars, this case was disaster, now narrowly
> > > avoided for the most
> > > > >> part. See http://www.calgunlaws.com/ and
> > > http://NRAMembersCouncils.com/
> > > > >for
> > > > >> articles.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> RKBA legal experts strongly suggest that those wishing
> to
> > > support getting
> > > > >a
> > > > >> Second Amendment case before the Supreme Court send
> their
> > > money to support
> > > > >a
> > > > >> case that does NOT arise in the hostile Ninth Circuit
> or
> > > California.  Note
> > > > >> that there are two Second Amendment cases being
> litigated
> > > in the District
> > > > >of
> > > > >> Columbia now, one by the NRA and one by CATO
> Institute.
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >Gee, didn't folk just rant and rave about the NRA not
> doing
> > > anything in the
> > > > >courts?
> > > >
> > > > Yep.  Most don't know of all the low profile gun cases
> the
> > > NRA funds
> > > > across the nation each year.
> > > >
> > > > The Silvera suit just wasn't one of them.  There's people
> I
> > > respect on
> > > > both sides of the aisle on this one.  My friends all
> believe
> > > that the
> > > > Second is an individual right, but they don't all agree
> that
> > > Silvera
> > > > was the best case to take to the SCOTUS.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Sam, eventually SCOTUS will hear a case on 2nd Amendment
> > > INDIVIDUAL rights.    I fear there isn't a "right" case.
> > >
> > > When that time comes I believe the left leaning court
> (SCOTUS
> > > in my opinion will over time continue it's march to the
> left)
> > > will say once and for all the 2nd Amendment is NOT an
> > > individual right.   This is a sickening thought and I hope
> and
> > > pray I'm wrong.
> > >
> > >
> > If they do that, the Supreme court will be in violation of
> their oath of
> > office.
> >
> > -*MORT*-
>
> I know the 2nd covers individual rights....... you know
> it....... but how do you know they know it?
>

They will have to listen to Con Law scholars like Akhil Amar and Laurence
Tribe who's scholarship (Amar mainly) also provides 2nd Amendment
application to the States through the 14th Amendment.

D.H.