vito Posted October 5, 2018 at 07:15 PM Share Posted October 5, 2018 at 07:15 PM Im feeling pretty confident now that Kavanaugh will shortly join the SCOTUS. Any key cases working their way to that level? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRJ Posted October 5, 2018 at 08:17 PM Share Posted October 5, 2018 at 08:17 PM I'm pretty sure, but not positive, that whoever gets confirmed after the start of the term gets to sit out until the next term. The seat will still be locked up by the President's appointed one, but the court is short handed for a little while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tip Posted October 5, 2018 at 08:30 PM Share Posted October 5, 2018 at 08:30 PM I'm pretty sure, but not positive, that whoever gets confirmed after the start of the term gets to sit out until the next term. The seat will still be locked up by the President's appointed one, but the court is short handed for a little while. Nope, he’ll get sworn in and seated as soon as possible - does not have to sit out. The only thing is he will not be able to vote on cases he didn’t hear orals on, but since the term is just beginning there really isn’t any backlog of cases so that’s not a concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chislinger Posted October 5, 2018 at 08:41 PM Share Posted October 5, 2018 at 08:41 PM The only thing is he will not be able to vote on cases he didn’t hear orals on, but since the term is just beginning there really isn’t any backlog of cases so that’s not a concern.He can vote on those cases, all he needs to do is read the transcripts of the arguments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tchostler Posted October 5, 2018 at 11:32 PM Share Posted October 5, 2018 at 11:32 PM i believe there are numerous lower court decisions that they have refused to hear. would be more comfortable if there was another constitutional judge appointed prior to hearing these cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gearsmithy Posted October 10, 2018 at 03:28 PM Share Posted October 10, 2018 at 03:28 PM https://dailycaller.com/2018/08/24/potential-gun-related-cases-that-could-reach-the-supreme-court/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoRonin70 Posted October 10, 2018 at 11:28 PM Share Posted October 10, 2018 at 11:28 PM There better be, and SCOTUS better take the d@mn cases finally, because this is the overwhelming reason that I'm okay with Kavanaugh being on the court. Constitutional originalism and Second Amendment issues, and he better uphold that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWBH Posted October 11, 2018 at 12:57 AM Share Posted October 11, 2018 at 12:57 AM This ^^^^^With an even number of conservative / lib judges, things could be locked up in stalemate.In which case, Molly should be called in for the deciding vote.If she's too busy, I'll do it. [sarcasm off]You are spot on my man - it's way past time the SCOTUS got off it's butt and got involved in defending a RIGHT in the Bill of Rights and not inventing rights where there is clearly no power given in the Constitution to do so, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2A4Cook Posted October 11, 2018 at 02:51 AM Share Posted October 11, 2018 at 02:51 AM Like the "right" to barge into Senate SCOTUS confirmation hearings with phony "assault" allegations? Like the right to be "believed?" We need more RBG's! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hap Posted October 11, 2018 at 02:43 PM Share Posted October 11, 2018 at 02:43 PM As I recall, Kagan recused herself from cases she had been involved with as Solicitor General. I wonder whether Kavanaugh would do likewise if a decision in which he had participated showed up at SCOTUS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soylentgreen Posted October 11, 2018 at 03:49 PM Share Posted October 11, 2018 at 03:49 PM Kavanaugh is on the court right now and hearing cases. I presume they will make decisions on what cases to take in the next session relatively soon and Kavanaugh will be voting on which cases they take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted October 11, 2018 at 06:39 PM Share Posted October 11, 2018 at 06:39 PM There better be, and SCOTUS better take the d@mn cases finally I agree the fact that for the most part the SCOTUS has twinkle-toed around their own Heller decision for a decade allowing a patchwork of restrictions and lower court miss-mash to stand, while states and municipalities continue to restrict the right for some and not others is disturbing... As a Constitutionally protected right, it should be universally honored and protected across the country, regardless of what your address is... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicagoresident Posted October 12, 2018 at 01:13 AM Share Posted October 12, 2018 at 01:13 AM If Highland Park v Friedman is denied, does that mean someone needs to file a different suit? I thought it just wasn't heard. http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/friedman-v-city-of-highland-park/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davey Posted October 12, 2018 at 02:14 AM Share Posted October 12, 2018 at 02:14 AM If Highland Park v Friedman is denied, does that mean someone needs to file a different suit? I thought it just wasn't heard. http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/friedman-v-city-of-highland-park/The highland park suit is over. Someone would need to start all over again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted October 12, 2018 at 02:28 AM Share Posted October 12, 2018 at 02:28 AM If Highland Park v Friedman is denied, does that mean someone needs to file a different suit? I thought it just wasn't heard. http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/friedman-v-city-of-highland-park/The highland park suit is over. Someone would need to start all over again. I'm not up to date, but there has to be a similar one somewhere already in progress that would be able to make it to the SCOTUS sooner... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangrel Posted October 12, 2018 at 02:44 AM Share Posted October 12, 2018 at 02:44 AM There better be, and SCOTUS better take the d@mn cases finally I agree the fact that for the most part the SCOTUS has twinkle-toed around their own Heller decision for a decade allowing a patchwork of restrictions and lower court miss-mash to stand, while states and municipalities continue to restrict the right for some and not others is disturbing... As a Constitutionally protected right, it should be universally honored and protected across the country, regardless of what your address is...Justice Thomas has been quite vocal in his dissent on turning down several of these cases. Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicagoresident Posted October 12, 2018 at 03:27 AM Share Posted October 12, 2018 at 03:27 AM There better be, and SCOTUS better take the d@mn cases finally I agree the fact that for the most part the SCOTUS has twinkle-toed around their own Heller decision for a decade allowing a patchwork of restrictions and lower court miss-mash to stand, while states and municipalities continue to restrict the right for some and not others is disturbing... As a Constitutionally protected right, it should be universally honored and protected across the country, regardless of what your address is...Justice Thomas has been quite vocal in his dissent on turning down several of these cases.But not because he's against limiting the scope of the the 2nd ammendment, quite the opposite. He even brought up Hellar saying the limiting scope wasn't what Scalia meant at all. Dissent on HP v Friedman Instead of adhering to our reasoning in Heller, the Seventh Circuit limited Heller to its facts, and read Heller to forbid only total bans on handguns used for self-defense in the home... The Seventh Circuit ultimately upheld a ban on many common semiautomatic firearms based on speculation about the laws potential policy benefits... (on Friedman v HP) This case illustrates why. If a broad ban on firearms can be upheld based on conjecture that the public might feel safer (while being no safer at all), then the Second Amendment guarantees nothing.https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf This is actually worth reading, because I used to say Heller VS DC was flawed in its limit to handguns, but this basically says they did not intend to limit DC VS Heller to handguns, just the lower courts are unconstitutional and misinterpreted what they stated. They're looking for a broader case that permanently enshrines semi auto long guns in the constructs of the 2nd ammendment like DC v Heller did for handguns. They saw gun grabbing lower courts twisting the words of DC VS Heller and are being careful not to make the same mistakes again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikew Posted October 14, 2018 at 02:30 PM Share Posted October 14, 2018 at 02:30 PM the lower courts are unconstitutional and misinterpreted what they stated.Just like US v Miller did not mean that you had no right to keep and bear arms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seanc Posted October 24, 2018 at 09:44 PM Share Posted October 24, 2018 at 09:44 PM Thomas & Gorsuch last summer said that the SCOTUS was treating the 2nd Amendment as a second class right, especially compared to how frequently 1st Amendment cases are reviewed by the SCOTUS. Now that Kavenaugh is on the bench, I think we'll see 2nd Amendment cases granted certiorari. We just need that 4th justice to sign on. I would think that Roberts or Alito could be persuaded to join them for the right case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.