Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: All arguments regarding the banning of guns or severely limiting access are ultimately circular [View all]gejohnston
(17,502 posts)35. you might not want McDonald v. Chicago overturned
Rather than focusing on the original intent of the Fourteenth Amendments framers, Chicago and Oak Park urge the Court, instead, to uphold rejecting incorporation of the Bill of Rights under the Privileges or Immunities Clause. Chicago and Oak Park point to the Slaughterhouse Cases, where the Court held that the Fourteenth Amendments Privileges or Immunities Clause includes only those rights that are dependent upon citizenship of the United States, and not citizenship of a State. Such rights would include, for example, the freedom to petition the government, to run for political office, to become a citizen of any state through residence; however, such rights did not include those enumerated in the Bill of Rights, including the right to bear arms. Chicago and Oak Park also point to the seminal cases of United States v. Cruikshank, which held that the Second Amendment did not apply to the States, and Presser v. Illinois, which held that the right to keep and bear arms is not a privilege or immunity of United States citizenship. They thus argue that the Court should use the doctrine of stare decision to uphold cases that explicitly reject incorporation of the Second Amendment through the Fourteenth Amendments privileges or immunities clause.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/08-1521
But many liberal legal scholars supported McDonald hoping it would overturn the Slaughterhouse cases. One of them included CA Gov Jerry Brown, although he supported the 2A angle.
Cruikshank also said the first amendment, freedom of assembly, did not apply to the states either. That same decision interpreted the 14th in such a way that made civil rights laws of the time unenforceable and paved the way to Jim Crow. If McDonald were to be overturned, that could open the floodgate for nutcase state governments to attack other rights, like choice, using Privilege or Immunities Clause.
Careful what you ask for.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
58 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
All arguments regarding the banning of guns or severely limiting access are ultimately circular [View all]
Toronto
Dec 2012
OP
not unlimited scope - only for purposes of having a well regulated militia and that is ALL nt
msongs
Dec 2012
#4
2A has been correctly interpreted in DC v Heller and McDonald v Chicago. That's the law so learn to
jody
Dec 2012
#23
That bullshit is decidedly incorrect. And the fruit of some concerted conservative mindfuck
Loudly
Dec 2012
#41
The media doesn't help. Watch the evening news. You would think good things only happen rarely. nt
Mojorabbit
Dec 2012
#3
USA is not a healthy society and has not been for nigh on forty years. We tend to
Tuesday Afternoon
Dec 2012
#7
some of that is due to medical advancement and can not be denied. I did not speak specifically to
Tuesday Afternoon
Dec 2012
#15
OMG...you think that the NRA and FOX are the only ones exploiting your fears...
Toronto
Dec 2012
#16
You seem to be making a great effort to absolve the NRA of any responsibility
SecularMotion
Dec 2012
#46
A perfectly healthy society would be a utopia or if you believe in religion a heaven. ...
spin
Dec 2012
#17
Could Obama not sign an Executive Order with a process that has absolutely nothing to do with
libdem4life
Dec 2012
#31
No I don't and like many other non-gun owners, getting up to speed as quickly as possible.
libdem4life
Dec 2012
#39
Good to know. I think it's going to have to increase however, on every level of the trade
libdem4life
Dec 2012
#42
The 2nd Amendment Can Be Repealed, Replaced Or Modified - So Banning Guns Is Wholly Possible
cantbeserious
Dec 2012
#51