|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
IL: Illinois groups watch for signs from Trump Supreme Court nominee on key state issues
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on McDonald vs. Chicago, which found the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms applies to all states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director Richard Pearson said it’s important the new justice be a strict constructionist who follows what the framers set out for in Second Amendment.
Pearson has said his group is involved in one case – fighting suburban Deerfield's attempt to ban certain guns – that it is prepared to take to the Supreme Court. The ban was put on hold last month when a Lake County circuit court put an injunction on the ordinance. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(7/13/2018)
|
| "Political mapmaking" is, by definition, a POLITICAL issue. Courts are not constitutionally empowered to usurp political issues - they are the province of legislatures. If you want to affect the results of redistricting, then change the balance of representatives in your legislature. You cannot circumvent their constitutional authority to act, whether or not you like the results. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
