Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Rudy Weighs in (And get's on board quickly)

This from the Giuliani campaign minutes ago:

"I strongly believe that Judge Silberman’s decision deserves to be upheld by the Supreme Court. The Parker decision is an excellent example of a judge looking to find the meaning of the words in the Constitution, not what he would like them to mean."

BTW, by popular request, here's the whole article by Mike O'Shea that Glenn Reynolds referenced a few posts back:
How many Americans would view District of Columbia v. Parker as the most important court case of the last thirty years? The answer must run into seven figures. The decision would have far-reaching effects, particularly in the event of a reversal.
[...]
It isn’t hyperbole to compare Parker to Roe v. Wade in its potential impact on American politics. Indeed, while the "estoppel by Establishment Clause" argument I just gave is intended to be elegant, persuasive and troubling to legal academics (after all, I ripped it off from Akhil Amar), there is a way more straightforward comparison that a whole lot of average Americans would be making. That's a comparison between the Court's handling of the enumerated rights claim at issue in Parker, and its demonstrated willingness to embrace even non-enumerated individual rights that are congenial to the political left, in cases like Roe and Lawrence. "So the Constitution says Roe, but it doesn't say I have the right to keep a gun to defend my home, huh?"

I would expect to see large public demonstrations in Washington during the pendency of Parker, and political candidates being forced to take sides on the litigation (as is already beginning to happen). The case would cast a long shadow on the national elections in 2008 and beyond.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

So NOW Rudy decides to take the opposite position of Sarah Brady. How convenient and just in time to run for President in the Republican Primary.

PN NJ said...

It should also be quite entertaining to watch Hillary's tap dance on 2A rights.

Anonymous said...

Does anybody really believe that Rudy is remotely interested in second amendment issues for anything other that gun votes on election day. The day after the election and you can bet that Rudy is turning his back on firearms owners just like old time.

He cannot be trusted.