Chicago to Supreme court .. "we cant hear you"

[Molon Labe]

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

@Molon Labe - Will you please be my friend? <puppy-dog eyes> I'm trying to become a criminal defense lawyer and I could really use the perspective of someone who is a real lawyer from time to time, especially once I get my prereqs out of the way.

Feel free to run anything by me any time you want. I'm not an old pro by any means though.

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

The relevant part of the 13th Amendment
Quote:
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.
prevents the states from denying rights that are guaranteed to all US citizens, but nothing is said about local ordinances.

Only Justice Thomas (and me, FWIW) agree that the case should have been decided under the P&I clause. Whenever part of the Bill of Rights is held against the States, it's done under the due process clause of the 14th Amdendment, not Privileges and Immunities. Also, local governments derive their power from the State governments, so a restriction against the States binds localities as well.

Originally Posted by gimpy

Remember, If ones constitutional right (in this case the right to bear arms) is conflicting with another right (the right to life) then one cannot stand. And i'm pretty the right to life trumps the right to bear arms.

The only way the right to life could conflict with the right to bear arms would be if the bearer was so weak that picking up the weapon would give him/her a heart attack. Aside from that, the act of carrying a weapon cannot kill anyone. That you need to stretch the idea of a "conflict" beyond any semblance of rationality belies the weakness of your position.