3 ms·
" This was illegal, unconstitutional, and a massive overreach by Scalia, because obviously he undermined the Founders' expressed requirement for a Constitutiona
by jdkee 5y ago
" This was illegal, unconstitutional, and a massive overreach by Scalia, because obviously he undermined the Founders' expressed requirement for a Constitutional convention and 2/3rds both houses of Congress or of State legislatures to change the Constitution."
You are obviously not a lawyer.
"That this defacement of the Constitution occurred in the way that it did, the 2nd was vandalized without altering the literal words, is interesting, but I believe it only a matter of time before parts of DC v Heller (2008) are overturned for lack of accuracy, overreach, and flippantly reversing a hundred plus years of court precedent with garbage reasoning."
Have you read Heller, McDonald, or any of the various Circuit cases on Second Amendment rights?
- Maursault 5y ago> You are obviously not a lawyer. Flattery will get you nowhere. If you're going to disagree, then please just do so and defend your position rather than... I don't know what this is... empty heckles from the peanut gallery I guess. FWIW, since the Heller decision was unconstitutional, and McDonald was based on Heller, then it also is invalid and unconstitutional. The 2nd Amendment does not guarantee the right of the people to keep and bear arms, and never did, not unless you ignore the first three words of the Amendment, placed there at the beginning almost as if to underscore their importance in clearly laying out the scope of the Amendment, "A well-regulated militia."