(AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
Former Ohio secretary of state and gubernatorial candidate Ken Blackwell thinks so. Per an opinion piece on Fox Forum, Blackwell warns:
She is one of only three federal appellate judges in America to issue a court opinion saying that the Second Amendment does not apply to states. The case was Maloney v. Cuomo, and it came down this past January.
That means if Chicago, or even the state of Illinois or New York, wants to ban you from owning any guns at all, even in your own house, that’s okay with her. According to Judge Sotomayor, if your state or city bans all guns the way Washington, D.C. did, that’s okay under the Constitution.
Per SCOTUSBLOG:
The district court rejected the claim on the ground that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states. On appeal, the panel affirmed. Relying on the Supreme Court’s 1886 decision in Presser v. Illinois, it explained that it was “settled law . . . that the Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government seeks to impose” on the individual’s right to bear arms. The Supreme Court’s recent decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, the court continued, “does not invalidate this longstanding principle.”
And the Second Amendment Foundation warns us:
Incorporation may be taken up by the high court during its next session beginning in October, because attorneys in the Maloney case plan to appeal in late June.
“If the Maloney appeal is accepted by the Supreme Court,” Gottlieb wondered, “would Justice Sotomayor – provided she is confirmed – recuse herself from deliberations?”
Another concern for gun owners, per SAF:
“Would a Justice Sotomayor be just as protective of the privacy rights of concealed carry permit holders if a newspaper wanted to publish that information,” Gottlieb asked. “We hope that during Senate confirmation hearings, someone asks about her positions on incorporation and the privacy rights of gun owners. The Second Amendment needs to be expanded, not eviscerated.”
A few personal observations:
The scariest thing I've heard her say is how "policy is made" at the U.S. Court of Appeals. I'm also of the mind that the law should be indifferent to sex and heritage. Her assertion that " 'a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion' than a 'white male' judge' " is just plain offensive. To those who say it's not, ask them to reverse the assumption.
But what did we expect? Obama is going to nominate who he thinks he can get confirmed. If not this candidate, then who? And don't forget that Sotomayor was originally placed on a federal bench at the recommendation of Bush the Elder--the same guy who gave us David Souter.
Who is Obama likely to nominate who will be "better"?
So am I suggesting we roll over and accept her without a fight? No, it's just that I don't have high hopes the Republicans are motivated enough to put more than a show opposition into this. They will calculate the political costs of mounting a resistance as well as the outcome should they succeed. Then how long will they be willing to sustain a campaign against the next nominee, or the one after that?
Particularly if they don't hear well-articulated reasons from you, their constituents, that credibly convince them there will be a price to pay for displeasing you?
You can do that by contacting your senators. Will you?
You can also take a poll over at KeepAndBearArms.com (scroll down the left margin).
I'll be talking more about the Sotomayor nomination tonight on the Andy Caldwell Show at 3:00 4:00 pm PST. The website has a link for live feed, or if you live in the Central Coast (CA) area, you can listen on KUHL AM 1440.
------------
Speaking of radio...
Los Angeles Gun Rights Examiner John Longenecker will be Lou Dobbs' guest today at 1:30 PST. Click here for more information.
Check out other Gun Rights Examiners:
- Atlanta: Carrying a firearm openly is not illegal in Georgia
- Austin: Gun control and the Republican party (Part 2)
- Boston: M.D.’s fixing what ails the country
- Charlotte: Armed self-defense: 'To shoot fast, you have to see fast'
- Cleveland: Liberals out of touch with reality regarding gun control
- DC: Congress joins states in making parks safe for gun carry
- Denver: When do you actually own a new gun?
- Los Angeles: Sovereignty 101, Part II: No Alternatives to the State?
- Minneapolis: A great couple of days in the Midwest
- Seattle: Surprise! Obama nominates liberal to Supreme Court
- St. Louis: Suppressors (aka 'silencers') are for safety
- Wisconsin: Gun rights advocates make progress
Also see:
- New York University: Maloney v Cuomo decision
- Seattle Gun Rights Examiner Dave Workman: "Surprise! Obama nominates liberal to Supreme Court"
NOTE: I see your comments are still being cut off. I have submitted a troubleshooting ticket and just got done grousing at the fine tech folks who make this all possible for us. Please continue to keep your comments brief until they get this figured out.
Comments
The 1st Amendment starts out with "Congress shall make no law...", so this is the only one that can be argued to be limited to the Feds, by Sotomayor's standards. Yet, watch her scream bloody murder if a state tries to abrogate the 1A. But the states can do anythiung they want to the 2A, which has no qualifier as to who is prohibited from infringeing the right to keep and bear arms. And, a Latina can make a better decision than an old white man? Wow! Just...wow!
A socialist hypocrite and a ra
*ahem* A socialist hypocrite and a racist, all in one! Just doesn't get anty better for Obama, does it? (I don't know what happened to the end of my post.)
My Senators are in her loony club... It doesn't do us any good to waste ink on them.
Got your 6, David. Already sent off letters to my Senators, as well as all the pro-gun leaning Democrat Senators that Ken Blackwell identified. Win or lose it is a fight worth fighting, to remind all the elected officials in DC we're watching if nothing else.
Fox News this morning projected that there won't be too much opposition to her, because she's a liberal replacing a liberal. The suggestion was that the GOP will save its opposition for a more dangerous candidate, so to speak.
Just e-mailed both my Senators. My state's junior Senator happens to be the ranking minority member on the Judicary committee.
He's already attacking her racist comment and I believe I've heard him mention the dangerous comment about making policy from the bench.
I sent him a link to this article pointing out her horrid RKBA record as another point of attack.
Oddly enough Republicans are afraid of "offending" Latinos by rejecting this Judge.
News update, last I heard Puerto Ricans and Mexicans hate each other....No Central or South American "Latino" (of which Mexicans also hate to be called) is going to give a damn if this Judge is rejected. (I doubt Puerto Ricans will either)
Just sent my Senators an email telling them to reject her nomination and not to confirm her! She's Bammer's way of getting back at us for thwarting every effort his administration has put forth on curtailling our 2A rights!
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!