I'd put my money on:

Individual right and handgun ban goes down, but nothing else. Not even standard 
of review. As CJ Roberts said, if they figure a complete ban flunks every 
standard of scrutiny, why decide which applies? The courts fought out the 
standards applicable to the 1st Amendment over decades, maybe the same will be 
true of the 2nd.


-----Original Message-----
>From: Guy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Mar 19, 2008 10:47 AM
>To: 'Firearms Regs List' <[email protected]>
>Subject: Heller wagers
>
>After listening to the oral arguments (my semi-real-time observations are at
>http://www.guysmith.org/blog/2008/03/18/heller-oral-arguments/), I'm laying
>the following bets on how the sundry justices will vote.
>
> 
>
>
> 
>
>Individual Right
>
>Strict Scrutiny
>
>
>Alito
>
>Yes
>
>Yes
>
>
>Breyer
>
> 
>
>No
>
>
>Ginsberg
>
>No
>
>No
>
>
>Kennedy
>
> 
>
> 
>
>
>Roberts
>
>Yes
>
>Yes
>
>
>Scalia
>
>Yes
>
>Yes
>
>
>Souter
>
>No
>
>No
>
>
>Stevens
>
> 
>
>No
>
>
>Thomas
>
>Yes
>
>Yes
>
>
>Total
>
>4
>
>4
>
> 
>
> 
>
>Anyone have contradictions, amplifications, or alternate summaries?  I'm
>gathering con law input to create a consensus bet on the outcome.
>
> 
>
>Yours in Liberty 
>
>Guy Smith 
>
>www.GunFacts.info <http://www.gunfacts.info/>  
>

_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Reply via email to