Anthony Canales is the President of the
San Fernando Valley NRA Member’s Council.
He works as a Quality Control Manager in Glendale, California. He is married with one son.
The opinions expressed in 'News Briefs' belong solely to the author
and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National
Rifle Association of America or the NRA Members' Councils of California.
"...CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Your approach-- your original approach
would give judges a lot more power and flexibility in determining what rights
they think a good idea than they have now with the constraints of the Due
Process Clause.
MR. GURA: No, Your Honor; our approach might actually actually provide
judges with perhaps no more than what they have now, perhaps even less,
because our approach is rooted in text and history. It's not a license for judges
to make up enenumerated rights that they believe--
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Privileges and immunities give you a lot more
flexibility than due process, because it is not limited to procedural-- where
you don't have to deal with the hurdle that it's limited to procedural by the text.
MR. GURA: Sure. If I may?
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Yes, you may.
MR. GURA: We believe that it's more limited because that-- that text had a
specific understanding and that there are guide posts left behind in texts and
history that tell us how to apply it, unlike the due process. But at least we know
one thing, which is that in 1868 the right to keep and bear arms was understood
to be a privilege or immunity of citizenship, and if the Court is considering
watering down the Second Amendment perhaps it should look to text and history.
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Thank you, counsel.
MR. GURA: Thanks.
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: The case is submitted....."
- From the draft oral arguments of
McDonald v. Chicago, March 2, 2010,
Page 63 of 77, discussion of
incorporation by the Privileges
and Immunities Clause-
To All,
Time to whip out that "little guillotine", it seems:
Lawyers, Guns, And Other People's Money:
Those firearms activists who live on the World Infamous Left Coast, home of
the US Judiciary's 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, can hardly imagine a situation
where anyone in their right minds would give "free reign" to unchecked judicial
activism.
Yet if Chief Justice Robert's question to Alan Gura during oral arguments of
McDonald the other day is of any indication, someone out there was not taking
into account all the possibilities of what appears to be a massive downside to
a purely theoretical exercise on the part of a few with little real "skin in game".
In other words, Alan Gura seems to be relying on a self-imposed judicial
restraint, or at least judicial reticence to go off hunting for more penumbras,
over the issue of the right to keep and bear arms.
It's either that, or that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has not a clue
as to what constrains him and 8 other Justices when they pass judgment from
the Highest Court in the land.
Personally, this poster would bet real money that it's the Chief Justice here
who understands what it takes to keep Pandora's Box locked and secure. And
while it's understandable that others may have a high opinion of Mr. Gura's
talents, perhaps next time he can try his unique style of legal arbitrage on a
topic more innocuous and less critical to the safety of the Republic. There is