Gun owners have plenty to worry about with the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, based on her case history on Second Amendment rights.
Sotomayor made her feelings on the Second Amendment known last January, when she ruled with the Second Circuit on the case of Maloney v. Cuomo, which upheld a New York ban on several types of weapons, including nunchucks.
In that case, Sotomayor and the Second Circuit relied on the Supreme Court’s 1886 decision in Presser v. Illinois, and concluded that it was “settled law [....] that the Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government seeks to impose” on an American’s right to bear arms.
The Maloney v. Cuomo case is even more troubling as it comes shortly after the 2008 Supreme Court ruling on District of Columbia v. Heller, which struck down DC’s handgun ban.
Sotomayor “is one of only three federal appellate judges in America to issue a court opinion saying that the Second Amendment does not apply to states,” warns Former Ohio secretary of state and gubernatorial candidate Ken Blackwell.
Citing the Maloney v. Cuomo case, Blackwell concludes, “that means if Chicago, or even the state of Illinois or New York, wants to ban you from owning any guns at all, even in your own house, that’s okay with her.”
The Second Amendment Foundation conjures up the prospect of a Sotomayor-SCOTUS taking up the appeal of Maloney v. Cuomo. “would Justice Sotomayor – provided she is confirmed – recuse herself from deliberations?,” wonders SAF founder Alan M. Gottlieb.
More from TRP
- 48% Of Black Women Have Herpes: CDC
- ANC Defends “Kill The Boer” Song
- Underpants Bomber Would Not Have Blown Up Plane
TRP Recommends
- Pelosi's Pig in a Poke (The Wall Street Journal)
- What's going on? (Denver Post News)
- Pocket Docket: Supreme Court's New Season (The Wall Street Journal)
![Recommend [therightperspective]](http://s3.amazonaws.com/arkayne-media/img/logo-recommend-us.png){kind=logo}
Related posts:
This is part of the plan. Take the guns away first so nobody can fight back when they take your other private property for equalization, and the state. If that is not communism then pleas tell me what it is.
hi joe from jersey
i guess you must be busy, with getting ready to move to idaho.
localities and states have a right to create their own laws on this.
no guns in jersey, joe.
bye
The Constitution was/is a compact/contract between “we the people” and the public servant administators we elect to represent us after they have taken an oath to “uphold and defend our Constitution against all enemies both domestic and foreign”.
Thus any representative of “we the people” who proposes or votes for legislation which will act in derogation of the intent of our Constitution is a TRAITOR to our ‘Constitution and should be indicted, tried and removed from public office.
Sotomayor believe the 2nd Amendment is not enforcible at the State level of govt, which is patently false. i.e., representatives of “we the people” at the State Level of Govt are sent to D.C. empowered to make decisions for that State, and when they make a Federal law not inconsistent with the intent of the Constitution the states must strike down all State legislation inconsidtent with the Federal Legislation. Otherwise we would have conflicting Catch-22 laws where if you follow it your are guilty and if you fon’t follow it you are guilty.
Sotomayor also advocates Racist Reverse Disrimination numerical hiring goals which violate the Oath Of Office all govt empllyees and elected representatives of “we the people” take and which requires that our decisions never consider race, color, ethnic origin, religion concerning the the human beings we need to make decisions about.
Sotomayor wold be anathema to our Constitution and should not be considered to appointment to the Supreme Court under any circumstance.
No one should ever make it to tjhe Supreme Court unless that individual has a demonsrated history of following the Constitution to the letter of that governing fundamental document.
It is my opinion that life tenure is inconsistent with good management practices and term limits should be applied to the Supreme Court and to the members of both hosues of Congress such that no individual may remain in public office for more than ten years.
So say I,
Robert Ingram Powell,Ph.D.
w6vro@msn.com
The Right to Life itself presupposes the Right to Self-Defense to maintain one’s Inalienable, Individual Right to Life and Property inviolate against criminal aggression.
Without our 2nd Amendment Rights there is no Right to Life and/or property.
Circle the drain boys, circle the drain.
I have never owned a gun until recently by winning one supporting a fore company by buying a gun raffle ticket, BUT I have never been anti-gun. In fact I have been comforted by the fact that there are more guns than people. The US’s greatest asset is its people and when push comes to shove in one split second all US citizens, I am confident will turn into instant red-necks. We are the best standing army in the world. No person sane or otherwise knows that they could fight us conventionally on our own turf. We tend to forget all that divides us under such crises.
b
So let me understand this. A state may violate your constitutional rights and that is okay (for example: freedom of speech) as long as the federal government is not involved in the process? Seems to me that if she agrees with your position then the constitution is the law of the land. If she doesn’t, well then state’s rights take priority. It is a clever argument to be sure, but not at all honest. I would suggest not confirming this person.
JP
The Constitution is the highest law of the land, and the intent may not be altered by simple legislation at any level of government. Further, the Bill of RIghts describes INDIVIDUAL rights. The argument that the 2nd Amendment refers to the current National Guards (a state government functionary) right to bear arms is uneducated at best, dishonest/traitorous at worst. The 2nd Amendment states that the right “shall not be infringed…”. It has already been grossly infringed, with nearly 20k laws related to firearms on the books. Read history. Understand that you used to be able to own the same weaponry as the Army so that you could fight an army if necessary. I don’t think 99% of Americans have any understanding of liberty or responsibility.