I don’t know if it will all as cut and dried as that.
For a case to gain ‘cert’, four (4) justices have to decide to hear the case.
And from what I’ve been able to determine, the ‘vote’ to decide to grant cert is very private, if not a secret ballot.
I’ve never heard of which justice voted for or ‘agin’ cert, so if SCOTUS decides not to take a 2A case, I don’t believe anyone can definitively point a finger at any one of them.
And that just may be the plan of all that.
The temptation to do an Emily Latella on the post, as it is written, is irresistible.
Why is the Supreme Court even interested in gun cases? Are they going to legislate from the bench that I have to buy a Pelican case, or can I keep my old revolver in a soft-side zippered gun rug?
What? You meant COURT cases, not GUN cases?
Never mind.
They wouldn’t grant cert for gun cases when Scalia was alive. Since they are so secretive (why is this allowed?) we have to assume that there are one or more defectors from the majority in Heller/McDonald. My money is on Roberts though it could be Kennedy.
April 10th, 2017 at 6:37 pm
I don’t know if it will all as cut and dried as that.
For a case to gain ‘cert’, four (4) justices have to decide to hear the case.
And from what I’ve been able to determine, the ‘vote’ to decide to grant cert is very private, if not a secret ballot.
I’ve never heard of which justice voted for or ‘agin’ cert, so if SCOTUS decides not to take a 2A case, I don’t believe anyone can definitively point a finger at any one of them.
And that just may be the plan of all that.
April 11th, 2017 at 2:29 pm
The temptation to do an Emily Latella on the post, as it is written, is irresistible.
Why is the Supreme Court even interested in gun cases? Are they going to legislate from the bench that I have to buy a Pelican case, or can I keep my old revolver in a soft-side zippered gun rug?
What? You meant COURT cases, not GUN cases?
Never mind.
April 11th, 2017 at 4:18 pm
They wouldn’t grant cert for gun cases when Scalia was alive. Since they are so secretive (why is this allowed?) we have to assume that there are one or more defectors from the majority in Heller/McDonald. My money is on Roberts though it could be Kennedy.