Igloodude
Member
It would be weird, but I was getting the distinct impression that Justice Ginsburg's thinking was going exactly that way.
First, could someone please provide a link for a good explanation of the sundry and various types of scrutiny? I'm close to having a PhD in Physical Chemistry and this still eludes full understanding for me.
Could one of you in layman's terms explain Strict Scutiny?
c. Second Amendment rights are subject to reasonable regulations.
If they use the term "reasonable regulations" (or restrictions) without a great deal of elaboration, we lose.
If the Supreme Court affirms the Court of Appeals and says "reasonable regulations" without further comment, all that means is that we still do not know what is reasonable but that D.C.'s ban is not.
For example, I think it's quite likely that the 9th Circuit would find all of California's gun laws to be "reasonable restrictions,"
Could one of you in layman's terms explain Strict Scrutiny?
The thought of what Judge Kozinski, probably my favorite federal judge, might do with a (fingers crossed, knock on wood) pro-individual rights holding on 2A in Heller is one of the things that help me go to sleep at night with a smile.There are a few in the 9th that are very much in favor of treating the 2nd as a broad fundamental right. One example would be Judge Alex Kozinski.
Your state may also have RKBA in its constitution.
A collective right opinion, even by the minority vote, will be hard to support - and they know the right will be self-enforcing.