Brett Kavanaugh Is Itching to Expand the Second Amendment

Source: Slate.com - View Original Article
Published: Apr 29, 2020
Category:
Bias Rating:

61% Conservative


Bias Score Calculation:


Policies:

Gun Control

Sentiments

91% "The plaintiffs in NYSRPA demanded the right to take their guns outside New York City, to other shooting ranges, competitions, and second homes.""
86% "They argued that the city's replacement law is also unconstitutional, and that they deserved damages for suffering under the old law.""
82% "Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, dissented in an opinion laying out his plans to expand the Second Amendment ..."
80% "In his NYSRPA dissent, Alito wrote that firearms regulations that did not exist in the founding era are likely unconstitutional today.""
79% "The city complied.""
78% "But the chief justice may also have simply wanted to defuse a bomb in a term already filled with blockbusters that will conclude months ..."
77% "Nor does it matter that federal courts may literally enable massacres by blocking such bans.""
75% "Because residents remained free to keep handguns in their homes, and the city had good reasons to keep them off the streets, the court ..."

We have listed the top 10 sentiments. More sentiments do exist. Please review the full article for more information.



*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization

Extremely
Liberal

Very
Liberal

Moderate-left

Neutral

Moderate-right

Very
Conservative

Extremely
Conservative

100%

100%

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

91% : The plaintiffs in NYSRPA demanded the right to take their guns outside New York City, to other shooting ranges, competitions, and second homes.
86% : They argued that the city's replacement law is also unconstitutional, and that they deserved damages for suffering under the old law.
82% : Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, dissented in an opinion laying out his plans to expand the Second Amendment in a future case.
80% : In his NYSRPA dissent, Alito wrote that firearms regulations that did not exist in "the founding era" are likely unconstitutional today.
79% : The city complied.
78% : But the chief justice may also have simply wanted to defuse a bomb in a term already filled with blockbusters that will conclude months before the 2020 election.
77% : The plaintiffs tried to manufacture new issues to keep their case alive.
77% : Nor does it matter that federal courts may literally enable massacres by blocking such bans.
75% : (There are seven, at least one in each borough.)
75% : Because residents remained free to keep handguns in their homes, and the city had good reasons to keep them off the streets, the court upheld New York City's law.
75% : Then the New York Legislature barred the city from reviving the old law.
75% : Unless a gun law was "in force around the time of the adoption of the Second Amendment" in 1791, it's probably invalid.
74% : The only real question now is whether Chief Justice John Roberts is ready to join their crusade.
73% : So where's the dispute?
71% : Here, the plaintiffs demanded that New York City stop enforcing its old gun law.
69% : While sitting on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Kavanaugh made it very clear that he will fight for these rights.
69% : "If that is true, there is cause for concern.
69% : He appears less enthusiastic than his fellow conservatives about gun rights, possibly because he recognizes that these cases put the court in a dangerous position.
69% : " If the Supreme Court prevents Americans from protecting themselves against guns, more people will die.
67% : Gun safety advocates deemed the decision a victory, but it is, in reality, a reprieve -- one that won't last long.
67% : The case began as an attack on New York City's restrictive firearm laws, which limited residents' ability to transport handguns outside the home.
67% : As the conservative Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson wrote in 2017, telling Americans "in the wake of so many mass shootings" that "all they can do is stand by and watch as federal courts design their destiny" would "deliver a body blow to democracy.
66% : Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch are also palpably eager to knock down lifesaving gun laws.
61% : It's tough to tell whether Roberts will go along with this dramatic expansion of the Second Amendment.
58% : Four conservative justices announced their intention to broaden the right to bear arms as soon as possible, resuming the Second Amendment revolution the court began in 2008.
58% : That ruling handed a narrow win to gun safety activists, but it may be the shortest-lived triumph in Supreme Court history.
56% : So New York City repealed the measure, replacing it with a more lenient regulation that let residents with premises licenses take their guns outside city limits.
56% : The court, Kavanaugh concluded, "should address that issue soon, perhaps in one of the several Second Amendment cases" currently sitting on the court's doorstep.
55% : In 2018, the 2 U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld New York City's law.
52% : Roberts' decision to dismiss NYSRPA, and his refusal to join Kavanaugh's concurrence, suggests that he may not be prepared to obliterate the nation's gun safety laws.
51% : Monday's ruling in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. New York decides almost nothing.
51% : The gun lobby has long sought to establish a constitutional right to purchase assault weapons and carry a concealed firearm in public places.
47% : New York City's strenuous effort to stop the Supreme Court from expanding the Second Amendment succeeded on Monday when six justices dismissed a challenge to the city's former gun law.
46% : Kavanaugh also wrote that he shares Alito's "concern" that lower courts "may not be properly applying Heller and McDonald."
46% : It does not matter that large-capacity magazine bans demonstrably limit casualties in mass shootings.
46% : Even modest limitations on interstate gun transfers are suspect in the eyes of Second Amendment extremists.
45% : There are at least a dozen gun rights cases pending before the Supreme Court.
43% : The court declared that the Supreme Court's Second Amendment decisions, D.C. v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago, protect "the core right" of "self-defense in the home."
41% : These actions created a problem for SCOTUS.
41% : As Donald Trump's judicial appointees have demonstrated, no gun law will be safe:
40% : "We are told that the mode of review in this case is representative of the way Heller has been treated in the lower courts," Alito concluded.
39% : The majority explained that, if the plaintiffs believe New York City's replacement law is unconstitutional, they can go back to the lower courts and make their case.
39% : Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the majority but wrote separately to note that he agrees with Alito's "general analysis" of the right to bear arms.
38% : (There is ample evidence that the Supreme Court misunderstood the historical evidence in creating this "core right," but leave that aside.)
37% : New Yorkers could also request a "premises license," which generally required them to keep their gun at home.
33% : At the start of this litigation, residents with a premises license could only transport their gun to a shooting range within city limits.
33% : The federal judiciary has a responsibility to safeguard Americans' access to weapons of war, even if it facilitates mass murder in the process.
32% : Second, they hoped the court would use this case to broaden the scope of the Second Amendment, paving the way for a constitutional right to concealed carry.
31% : Residents could apply for a "carry license," which authorizes concealed-carry throughout the city, but law enforcement had discretion to deny their request.
31% : History provides no support for a restriction of this type," he insisted, chastising the 2 Circuit for upholding New York City's now-dead restriction.
28% : But Brett Kavanaugh is itching to expand the right to bear arms ASAP.
25% : By a 6-3 vote, the Supreme Court rejected the plaintiffs' arguments on Monday in a two-page decision.
25% : And although the plaintiffs now ask for damages, they made no such demand in their initial lawsuit.
24% : City and state lawmakers feared that SCOTUS would not only strike down the law at issue but also use the case to supercharge the Second Amendment, putting countless other gun safety laws in jeopardy.
24% : He argued that courts should only uphold "gun regulations that are longstanding" and invalidate any restrictions that are not "sufficiently rooted in text, history, and tradition.
23% : The Constitution allows federal courts to hear only live disputes, not "moot" cases where the plaintiffs already got what they wanted.
21% : The Supreme Court then agreed to review the 2 Circuit's decision.
16% : So they have to ask the lower courts for permission to add a damages claim.
16% : All four justices, in other words, want to wipe away any gun laws that depart from practices in 1791, when the Second Amendment was ratified.
16% : Under their approach, states could not ban large-capacity magazines or AR-15s because these weapons did not exist 229 years ago.
12% : " Applying this test, Kavanaugh wrote (in dissent) that the District of Columbia's assault weapons ban is unconstitutional.
10% : If so, he can now pick a better vehicle and, along with his four conservative colleagues, empower lower courts to sweep away the nation's gun control regime.
8% : We will have to wait a little longer to learn whether Roberts thinks the right to bear arms outweighs everybody else's right not to get shot.
7% : First, they only get attorneys' fees if they actually prevail in court, and representation from legal luminaries like Paul Clement doesn't come cheap.
7% : Several ask whether states can ban assault weapons or strictly limit concealed carry.
4% : There are two more unstated reasons why the plaintiffs badly wanted SCOTUS to decide this case.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization

Share via
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap