Friday, July 2, 2010

IDIOTS: How did four Supreme Court justices wind up arguing against the Constitution?

Maybe we should avoid revisiting the McDonald decision too often, in order to avoid looking a gift horse in the mouth. The Supreme Court has made an individual right to gun ownership settled law, more than 220 years after the founders mistakenly believed they had settled the issue. Reason’s Jacob Sullum isn’t satisfied with the conclusion, however, after watching four Supreme Court justices argue against the Constitution and individual rights in general:

In their dissenting opinions, Justices John Paul Stevens and Stephen Breyer (joined by Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor) worry that overturning gun control laws undermines democracy. If “the people” want to ban handguns, they say, “the people” should be allowed to implement that desire through their elected representatives.

What if the people want to ban books that offend them, establish an official church, or authorize police to conduct warrantless searches at will? Those options are also foreclosed by constitutional provisions that apply to the states by way of the 14th Amendment. The crucial difference between a pure democracy and a constitutional democracy like ours is that sometimes the majority does not decide. READ MORE...

1 comment:

  1. We are not a democracy. The United States is a Republic.