A reader mindful of Kerr Mudgeon’s legal background inquired about how he thinks the U.S. Supreme Court is likely to decide the District of Columbia gun ban case it currently is considering. On the assumption that the court will decide the case rather than sending it back to a lower court for further consideration there or otherwise ducking the issue, K.R. responded as follows:
“My guess -- and it is only a guess -- is that they will rule that the second amendment guarantees an individual (as opposed to a collective or state) right, and that they will uphold the lower appellate court ruling striking down the DC law but leave the way open to ‘reasonable’ regulations and not resolve the question of what is reasonable. This would not be as bad as it might be but still far from perfect in that such a ruling would be tantamount to rewriting "shall not be infringed" as meaning "shall not be infringed except . . . . ? ? ? ?" Thus I expect the decision to be a political one with something for everyone rather than a clear constitutional ruling.”
Keep in mind that in recent years the court has ruled:
• In upholding Senator McVain’s incumbent protection legislation, that the first amendment prohibition on abridging free speech includes an exception that allows curbs on political speech for purposes that the court favors such as campaign finance reform.
• In upholding racial preferences at the University of Michigan Law School, that the fourteenth amendment provision guaranteeing everyone the equal protection of the laws does not preclude a state from favoring one individual over another on the basis of race if the preference advances a purpose that the court favors such as diversity.
• In allowing government to seize an individual’s home to turn it over to another private owner planning a development that will pay more taxes, that a person’s home is his castle only so long as some governmental unit doesn’t want it for something else.
K.R. plans to write and post more in the near future about how judges are fulfilling Thomas Jefferson’s expectation that, not being elected by, or accountable to anyone, they would become black robed despots. Under such judges the courts are abdicating their role as guardians and protectors of our liberties and becoming political handmaidens of oppressive government.