Heller ruling out of SCOTUS today?

[thejtrain]

10:12 Tom Goldstein - Heller affirmed.

The Court has released the opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290), on whether the District’s firearms regulations – which bar the possession of handguns and require shotguns and rifles to be kept disassembled or under trigger lock – violate the Second Amendment. The ruling below, which struck down the provisions in question, is affirmed.

Justice Scalia wrote the opinion. Justice Breyer dissented, joined by Justices Stevens, Souter and Ginsburg.

So it is 5-4. Hopefully Scalia will make us proud in the decision.

[neal6325]

Good new but what are the details......

[thejtrain]

Good new but what are the details......

We'll have to see when we get to read the decision. Also this:

It is striking that the decision is not clouded by ambiguity created by separate opinions. One opinion on each side.
Apologies - there is a second dissenting opinion, but only one majority - no plurality and no concurrences.

Dare we begin to hope?

[The Annoyed Man]

Fox News has just announced that the SCOTUS upheld the lower court decision overturning the DC Gun Ban. Scalia wrote the majority opinion. The decision was 5/4, with Kennedy being the swing vote - exactly as I had predicted would happen.

[Skiprr]

It's in, as of a couple of minutes ago. Justice Scalia wrote the opinion. Justice Breyer dissented, joined by Justices Stevens, Souter and Ginsburg; 5-4, the 2nd Amendment wins.

[KC5AV]

Tom Goldstein - Apologies - there is a second dissenting opinion, but only one majority - no plurality and no concurrences.

[The Annoyed Man]

The decision specifically states that the 2A is an individual right!

[Skiprr]

Eveyone's here at the same time, eh? We should have a block party...

[DParker]

Well. I guess that's what I get for giving Ginsburg the benefit of the doubt. Nonetheless....

Hooray for our side.

[thejtrain]

Opinion

[agbullet2k1]

......That is all....

[anygunanywhere]

This emphasizes the importance of electing McCain in November. We must maintain the status of the court.

I thought I would gag when I wrote that though.

Anygun

[drw]

So if the court has affirmed that we have an individual right to keep and BEAR arms, why would we any longer need permission from the government to carry?

[nitrogen]

So if the court has affirmed that we have an individual right to keep and BEAR arms, why would we any longer need permission from the government to carry?

Because the ruling wasn't specifically about that. i.e., go for it, if you want to be a test case.

[Pinkycatcher]

So if the court has affirmed that we have an individual right to keep and BEAR arms, why would we any longer need permission from the government to carry?

Yes, I've overviewed his opinion, he says that regulation of carrying is allowed, although he does reference Miller and says
"Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those
“in common use at the time� finds support in the historical tradition
of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. "

So I could see a challenge on automatic weapons, they are definately in common use in the army/militia.