The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 1, 2009, 09:49 AM   #1
jg0001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2007
Posts: 551
Heller & SCOTUS -- who voted which way?

See subject. Try as I might, my googling skills are failing me. Anyone have the list of who voted which way on Heller (at the SCOTUS level)? I ask with particular interest in whether or not Souter's retirement would have made any difference if it happened prior to the Heller decision. Thank you.
jg0001 is offline  
Old May 1, 2009, 10:58 AM   #2
model67a
Member
 
Join Date: February 19, 2009
Posts: 38
souter

I had difficulty finding it too. without finding it again, I found that souter voted against the ruling on the 2A. I believ if you will search D.C. V Heller you will find the vote breakdown. Would do it for you but have to go take care of some business. Hope this helps. stay safe
__________________
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!
Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790), 1759
model67a is offline  
Old May 1, 2009, 11:06 AM   #3
grymster2007
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: In the oak studded hills near Napa
Posts: 2,203
From wikipedia

"The opinion of the court, delivered by Justice Scalia, was joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. and by Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr."

"Justice Stevens' dissent was joined by Justices David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer."

It would not have changed the outcome.
__________________
grym
grymster2007 is offline  
Old May 1, 2009, 11:20 AM   #4
chemgirlie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 3, 2009
Location: WI
Posts: 331
Souter's retirement won't have too much of an effect on the SCOTUS. He's pretty far left, and I imagine he'll be replaced by somebody with similar views. Unless one of the righties dies/retires (and I imagine most of them will try to hold on until Obama is out of office) not much is going to change.
chemgirlie is offline  
Old May 2, 2009, 08:04 PM   #5
Webleymkv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 9,925
I don't see much changing either, the most likely Justices to be replaced (besides Souter) are Stevens and Ginsburg (due to age and health respectively) and neither of them are known to be friends of the Second Amendment.
__________________
Smith, and Wesson, and Me. -H. Callahan
Well waddaya know, one buwwet weft! -E. Fudd
All bad precedents begin as justifiable measures. -J. Caesar
Webleymkv is offline  
Old May 2, 2009, 10:56 PM   #6
EastSideRich
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 19, 2007
Location: St Paul, Minnesota
Posts: 369
The scary thing is I can see all four of the dissenting justices (from the Heller case) being replaced in this term. I would even guess, although it's a little conspiratorial, that they will be persuaded to step down by this administration.
If they can replace 4 liberals (and just one conservative) with young, more "radical" justices who will remain seated for twenty or more years, well, you can imagine what will happen to our constitution.
We already have heard what the criteria are for His supreme court appointees:
In Barack Obama's words:

Quote:
"I want my justice to understand that part of the role of the court is to look out for the people who don't have political power," Obama said. "The people who are on the outside. The people who aren't represented. The people who don't have a lot of money; who don't have connections. That's the role of the court."
Quote:
“[W]e need somebody who’s got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that’s the criteria by which I’m going to be selecting my judges"
No Barack; it's not the role of the court, and not how you should be selecting Supreme Court Justices!!
__________________
Give your opponents one hundred dollars worth of steak, and you shall receive one trillion dollars worth of pork.
-Proverb of The US Congress
EastSideRich is offline  
Old May 2, 2009, 11:55 PM   #7
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,390
Something else to consider: Souter was a Republican appointee who turned out to be quite liberal.

It's entirely possible that an Democratic appointee could end up being a friend of the 2A, or at least inclined to stick with the Constitution as written.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old May 3, 2009, 07:48 AM   #8
RDak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 17, 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 734
I agree Tom. I don't see how anyone could be much more liberal than Souter.

Ginsburg was arguably more conservative than Souter for pete's sake IMHO.

And that ain't very conservative!!
RDak is offline  
Old May 3, 2009, 08:20 AM   #9
carguychris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 5,501
Quote:
Something else to consider: Souter was a Republican appointee who turned out to be quite liberal.

It's entirely possible that an Democratic appointee could end up being a friend of the 2A, or at least inclined to stick with the Constitution as written.
+2. Historically, SCOTUS justices have a habit of not turning out exactly the way their nominating president had hoped.

Secondly, in today's highly charged political climate, it's difficult for any justice to make it through the Senate if they've made any sharply definitive rulings on a highly controversial "wedge issue", regardless of which way the ruling went. So far, the Obama administration has mostly tiptoed around the gun-control issue, so I expect we won't see any nominees with a strong anti-gun record. Time will tell, though.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak
carguychris is offline  
Old May 3, 2009, 12:14 PM   #10
csmsss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 2,986
Quote:
Historically, SCOTUS justices have a habit of not turning out exactly the way their nominating president had hoped.
This is only partially true. With the exception of Byron White, essentially ALL of the justices appointed by Democratic presidents in the last few decades have been reliably anti-constitutional, whereas numerous justices appointed by Republican presidents have been toxic. Besides Souter, there has been John Paul Stevens (Ford), Warren Burger (Nixon), Earl Warren(Eisenhower). Besides White, has there been even one justice in the last half century nominated by a Democratic president who did not reside in the SCOTUS' liberal wing?
csmsss is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.08204 seconds with 9 queries