At least the ninth circuit is consistent
Not only does the second amendment not mean what it says, neither does the first.
Not only does the second amendment not mean what it says, neither does the first.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
Find Local
|
March 6th, 2007 at 10:50 am
[…] Eugene Volokh (via Uncle)comes word that the 9th Circuit Federal Court has ruled that wearing a shirt with a printed message […]
March 6th, 2007 at 10:57 am
seems perfectly consistent with established precedents — minors have effectively no rights, particularly not when at school.
no, i don’t like it either, but it does jive well with stare decisis and with previous case law. none of the three would be the case were i dictator, but i’m not.
March 8th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Nescio, if that be so, then the other side of this issue has no right to express their views, either. That obvioulsy is not the case. The court has done again what it has no right or legitimate power to do. It has advocated for a party before it, rather than render impartially an opinion based on law.
March 14th, 2007 at 9:46 pm
[…] At least the ninth circuit is consistent […]