Heller Oral Arguments Discussion

[ctdonath]

So ... what happened?

 

[romma]

11:30est on cspan.com I think some audio may be played.

 

[armoredman]

scotusblog says 11:45 Eastern, about 15 minutes from now, if I have my timing right...

 

[ctdonath]

Rumor is transcript will be up by 1PM at http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts.html

 

[legaleagle_45]

From Scotusblog:

Based just on the questioning, which can prove inaccurate, the Court is divided along ideological lines in Heller, with Justice Kennedy taking a strong view that the "operative clause" of the Second Amendment protects an individual right unconnected with militia service that guarantees the right to hunt and engage in self-defense. If the oral argument line up were to hold when the Court votes, the Court will recognize an individual right to bear arms that will not be seriously constrained by military service of any kind. There was a seemingly broad consensus that the right would not extend to machine guns, plastic guns that could evade metal detectors, and the like. There was relatively little disccusion of the trigger lock provision. Justice Breyer seemingly sought to pick up a fifth vote for a narrower reading of the Second Amendment by attempting to tie the question of the reasonableness of the regulation to whether the challenged statute left individuals with the ability to possess weapons that could be used in milita service. But at argument, at least, none of the Court's more conservative members expressed much interest in that approach, and Justice Kennedy's view that the operative clause is not directed at militia service would seem not to point in that direction.

If Kennedy is on board, that is 5.

 

[Spartacus451]

There was a seemingly broad consensus that the right would not extend to machine guns, plastic guns that could evade metal detectors, and the like.

What was the reasoning for this? The 2nd was meant to protect firearms used by the military as well. If a machine gun is what a militia needs to be effective then it follows that it is protected. Isn't that what we learn from US vs. Miller?

Can't wait to see the transcript.

 

[Guntalk]

More from Scotusblog:

Justice Kennedy was very active in today's argument. He asked the second question, advancing a theme to which he repeatedly returned: that the first clause of the Second Amendment merely was a "reaffirmation" of the Constitution's militia clauses, and suggested that the first clause did not limit the distinct right to keep and bear arms (which he referred to as the "operative clause"), which was unconnected -- he used the phrase "quite independent" -- from militia service. Kennedy expressed the view that the Second Amendment was a "supplement to" the militia clauses. Kennedy also returned several times to the 1689 English Bill of Rights as the model for the Second Amendment. Kennedy also indicated that he does not put a lot of stake in the Court's opinion in Miller, saying that it ends abruptly and does not fully elaborate the interests encompassed by the Amendment.
12:07
Update: Lyle's first take on today's argument is now available here. It begins: "The Supreme Court’s historic argument on the meaning of the Constitution’s Second Amendment sent out one quite clear signal: individuals may well wind up with a genuine right to have a gun for self-defense in their home. But what was not similarly clear was what kind of gun that would entail, and thus what kind of limitations government cut put on access or use of a weapon."

 

[frankie_the_yankee]

If we have Kennedy, that's a good sign. He is frequently the swing vote.

 

[Animal Mother]

The oral arguements have now begun airing on C-Span radio.

 

[jerkyman45]

Does anybody know if this is being broadcast on any radio station?

An answer to my question posted at the same time as my question^

 

[blacksheep]

Kennedy, Scalia, and Roberts, are hitting D.C. hard right now.

 

[armoredman]

Edited, too depressing of a statement. This does sound good.

 

[Thumper]

Sounds real good. Get 'em, Tony!

 

[legaleagle_45]

Dellinger is getting hammered!!!

 

[george29]

Dellinger is just stumbling over his own words, even Justice Kennedy couldn't save him from himself. Jackass!!

If we lose this it was pre-planned. I would defend myself before using Dellinger.

 

[romma]

God, my link is terrible. I need a good link, it keeps cutting out

 

[Sam Adams]

Where are you guys listening to this?????

 

[Kingcreek]

too bad no cameras. I'd like to see the spanking and not just listen to it.
I know its early and I'm no lawyer, but I'm feeling pretty good this right now.

http://www.c-span.org/watch/cs_cspan_wm.asp?Cat=TV&Code=CS

 

[TheDriver]

link to audio

for those who cant find it

http://www.c-span.org/watch/cs_cspan_wm.asp?Cat=TV&Code=CS

 

[legaleagle_45]

Cspan

 

[Animal Mother]

Dellinger is being destroyed!!

www.c-span.org

there is a link to listen to it on the main page.

 

[TheDriver]

Wow, Roberts and Scalia are tearing Dillinger apart. Scalia is so freaking smart.

 

[Guitargod1985]

It's on CSPAN right now.
Looks like Roberts, Kennedy, Alito and Scalia are on our side so far. Ginsburg is apparently against us - what a surprise. Haven't heard from the others yet, but suspect Thomas will side with Roberts et al.

 

[ctdonath]

Thomas doesn't say anything. Rarely does; thinks oral arguments are theater and not good jurisprudence, as ample opportunity has been given to provide fully-formed arguments in writing.

 

[rbernie]

CNN is broadcasting live audio on its web site.