News today: Supreme Court refusing to hear weapons bans

[GeauxLSU]

I don't think this is all bad. Maybe Roberts said no to hearing it because without Scalia there was a higher chance that the 2A would lose at the SCOTUS and we can have another run at it when there are 9 justices.

By not granting cert they are letting each individual circuit court's decision stand. Thus, even if a state decide to ban "assault weapons" the circuit court in the area can strike down the law as unconstitutional since there is no Supreme Court ruling on it.

This is certainly a better outcome than having the 2nd circuit's ruling upheld by the SCOTUS because then it applies nationwide.

(Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer)

You're giving Roberts WAY too much credit.

 

[chucklenut]

I'm all for the fools in Connecticut having their own rules. If that's the way they want to live, good for them. Funny, how "states rights" pops up in different discussions. IT's a "southern thing" don't you know?

If only the regulations abd opinions in other states would stay there

I habe to.take stock in another states affair due to the over bloated federal gov

Otherwise i agree

 

[Jmposey]

Everyone chill out. This is a good thing. Right now the court would split 4-4 anyway. But at least they're not making anything official by doing that.

This still saves us the chance that a Trump justice would overturn these kinds of bans next year.

Delays like this are the best we could pray for right now.