Tuesday, February 22, 2005
Mr. Smith goes to Washington
Melvin Smith was found guilty by a jury in Massachusetts of keeping and bearing arms.
Trouble was the judge had already found him innocent and dismissed his case.
Justice Scalia, that guy hated by liberals everywhere, said that that was double jeopardy.
Bill of Rights for $1000, Alex.
"This constitutional provision protects against being tried twice for keeping and bearing arms."
"What is the second amendment?" -buzz-
No, sorry, it's "What is the 5th Amendment?"
I'm about to read the 4-person dissent.pdf. Breyer, Ginsberg, Kennedy, Rehnquist.
It bothers me that there is no hint by any of the nineringwraiths justices that the offense he is charged with is unconstitutional, at least under U.S. v. Miller, since a pistol is certainly a militia weapon.
I was also troubled by his conviction, now overturned, on a three-strikes provision, where the three strikes seem to consist of three different ways of describing the same event. He was convicted of wanting to kill somebody, using a gun to do it, and having the gun he did it with. Very bad, but one crime, not three.
Right result here, because Scalia and Thomas voted, as they usually do, to uphold civil liberties set forth in the text of the constitution.
Let's see how much press coverage this gets:
"Scalia, Thomas, Uphold Constitution." Or not.
The other opinion today is covered by dredgereport.com.
It's one of those "when is a ship not a ship, for Jones Act purposes" cases,
that are pretty dull even to us court wonks.
Argued today was at least one of the takings cases, Melo, the www.ij.org one, no Lingle was too.
Word on the street is that plaintiffs will lose, but the opinions may move the standard slightly towad the pro-freedom side, which would be enough for IJ to claim a moral victory.
Melvin Smith was found guilty by a jury in Massachusetts of keeping and bearing arms.
Trouble was the judge had already found him innocent and dismissed his case.
Justice Scalia, that guy hated by liberals everywhere, said that that was double jeopardy.
Bill of Rights for $1000, Alex.
"This constitutional provision protects against being tried twice for keeping and bearing arms."
"What is the second amendment?" -buzz-
No, sorry, it's "What is the 5th Amendment?"
I'm about to read the 4-person dissent.pdf. Breyer, Ginsberg, Kennedy, Rehnquist.
It bothers me that there is no hint by any of the nine
I was also troubled by his conviction, now overturned, on a three-strikes provision, where the three strikes seem to consist of three different ways of describing the same event. He was convicted of wanting to kill somebody, using a gun to do it, and having the gun he did it with. Very bad, but one crime, not three.
Right result here, because Scalia and Thomas voted, as they usually do, to uphold civil liberties set forth in the text of the constitution.
Let's see how much press coverage this gets:
"Scalia, Thomas, Uphold Constitution." Or not.
The other opinion today is covered by dredgereport.com.
It's one of those "when is a ship not a ship, for Jones Act purposes" cases,
that are pretty dull even to us court wonks.
Argued today was at least one of the takings cases, Melo, the www.ij.org one, no Lingle was too.
Word on the street is that plaintiffs will lose, but the opinions may move the standard slightly towad the pro-freedom side, which would be enough for IJ to claim a moral victory.
Comments:
Post a Comment
