Trump Plans To Nominate Amy Coney Barrett To Supreme Court

[DispositionMatrix]

Salon.
Amy Coney Barrett and the Second Amendment: Why her "expansive view" is utter BS

That might be a bit dizzying, but given that Barrett was an English literature major and is a textualist, her imperative to avoid misinterpretation here would seem like a piece of cake.

To me (and to many others, including a number of Supreme Court justices), the obvious sense here is "In that a well-regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The latter thing, the right, is contingent on the former thing, the well-regulated militia and the need for such.

The original Congress that passed the Bill of Rights might have chosen to turn it around, as in "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed because a well-regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State" (and it was in that order in an original draft by Madison), but they chose to emphasize the "well-regulated Militia being necessary" clause, which in effect makes it a conditional clause  — if this is true, then this other thing follows.

[featureless]

Salon.
Amy Coney Barrett and the Second Amendment: Why her "expansive view" is utter BS

That might be a bit dizzying, but given that Barrett was an English literature major and is a textualist, her imperative to avoid misinterpretation here would seem like a piece of cake.

To me (and to many others, including a number of Supreme Court justices), the obvious sense here is "In that a well-regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The latter thing, the right, is contingent on the former thing, the well-regulated militia and the need for such.

The original Congress that passed the Bill of Rights might have chosen to turn it around, as in "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed because a well-regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State" (and it was in that order in an original draft by Madison), but they chose to emphasize the "well-regulated Militia being necessary" clause, which in effect makes it a conditional clause  — if this is true, then this other thing follows.

I find that view to be very odd since Sweetpotato Hitler was elected. Don't any democrats think a militia might be necessary? Say Trump loses and refuses to leave, as one example often fretted over, where the right to keep and bear might be important...

[sikacz]

Salon.
Amy Coney Barrett and the Second Amendment: Why her "expansive view" is utter BS

That might be a bit dizzying, but given that Barrett was an English literature major and is a textualist, her imperative to avoid misinterpretation here would seem like a piece of cake.

To me (and to many others, including a number of Supreme Court justices), the obvious sense here is "In that a well-regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The latter thing, the right, is contingent on the former thing, the well-regulated militia and the need for such.

The original Congress that passed the Bill of Rights might have chosen to turn it around, as in "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed because a well-regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State" (and it was in that order in an original draft by Madison), but they chose to emphasize the "well-regulated Militia being necessary" clause, which in effect makes it a conditional clause  — if this is true, then this other thing follows.

I find that view to be very odd since Sweetpotato Hitler was elected. Don't any democrats think a militia might be necessary? Say Trump loses and refuses to leave, as one example often fretted over, where the right to keep and bear might be important...

Or a pandemic effectively wipes out our national defense and a foreign military threat occurs....

Likely, who knows. But, without the ability to raise a militia to replace those forces the end result is predictable.

[highdesert]

Salon and the writer have their own agendas. Biden said he'll appoint a bi-partisan commission to look at the federal judiciary. That may put some fear in justices so who knows what will happen, Roberts is officially the head of the federal judiciary and I'll bet he's very concerned.

[DispositionMatrix]

Salon.
Amy Coney Barrett and the Second Amendment: Why her "expansive view" is utter BS

That might be a bit dizzying, but given that Barrett was an English literature major and is a textualist, her imperative to avoid misinterpretation here would seem like a piece of cake.

To me (and to many others, including a number of Supreme Court justices), the obvious sense here is "In that a well-regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The latter thing, the right, is contingent on the former thing, the well-regulated militia and the need for such.

The original Congress that passed the Bill of Rights might have chosen to turn it around, as in "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed because a well-regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State" (and it was in that order in an original draft by Madison), but they chose to emphasize the "well-regulated Militia being necessary" clause, which in effect makes it a conditional clause  — if this is true, then this other thing follows.

I find that view to be very odd since Sweetpotato Hitler was elected. Don't any democrats think a militia might be necessary? Say Trump loses and refuses to leave, as one example often fretted over, where the right to keep and bear might be important...

There is a noticeable push on the left to equate "militia" with "white supremacists" and to make people believe participation in a militia is illegal. Of course, the moment a militia were to become active doing _anything_ related to the public, it would most likely be in violation of law. I'm sure that would include any public activity in support of any position during a constitutional crisis. There is a post or two elsewhere about it.

[featureless]

There is a noticeable push on the left to equate "militia" with "white supremacists" and to make people believe participation in a militia is illegal.

It parallels the push that gun owners are all crazy or latent murderers, at best.

[highdesert]

There is a noticeable push on the left to equate "militia" with "white supremacists" and to make people believe participation in a militia is illegal.

It parallels the push that gun owners are all crazy or latent murderers, at best.

Yup, generalizing about the other side is what keeps our two parties at each others throats. Paint your opponent as less than human and then they become just like the Nazis.

[featureless]

Nazis.

Why didn't Hitler drink tequila?



It made him mean.

[TrueTexan]

In strange move Clarence Thomas – not Chief Justice Roberts – to administer oath to Amy Coney Barrett

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts will not officiate the swearing in of soon-to-be confirmed Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett Monday night. Instead, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, whose wife is a close Trump ally, will do the honors.

The event is set to take place between 8 and 9 PM Monday night, according the White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and media reports.

It’s unclear why the Chief Justice will not be administering the oath, but Justice Thomas and especially his wife, far right activist and lobbyist Ginni Thomas (photo) are close to the Trump white House.

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/10/in-st ... y-barrett/

Maybe John Robert’s is getting a conscience.

[CDFingers]

Fuck Schumer if he allows a quorum.

CDFingers

[YankeeTarheel]

It's done. Only Collins voted no.

Time to expand the Court. I'm 65 years old and in that time, EVERY Chief Justice has been Republican and the majority of the justices have been Republican appointees.