USSC HEARS THE VOICE OF FREEDOM OF SELF DEFENSE

fundamental individual civil right, and that gun bans, even on specific
types of commonly-owned firearms, do not stand up under even modest scrutiny.

"An affirmative ruling, which we anticipate sometime in late June,"
he concluded, "will provide a foundation upon which other Draconian
firearms laws can be challenged, and more importantly, it will destroy
a fantasy that has become a cornerstone argument for restrictive gun
control laws. This should put an end to the lie that the Second Amendment
only protects some mythical right of the states to organize a militia.
That was not true when the amendment was written, it is not true today,
and it will not be true tomorrow, regardless how hard extremist
gun banners try to make it so." [ emphasis added by David ]




Mr. Gottlieb told me that it looks good for a 6 to 3 or a 7 to 2 vote
in favor of personal freedom of self defense,
based upon the Justices' questions to counsel.

We expect the ANTI-Freedom side to be led by Stevens,
supported by Breyer; Souter can go either way.

In theory, this ruling cannot extend so far as to limit the powers
of the States, because no state law is before the court;
HOWEVER, in GIDEON v. WAINWRIGHT (1963) 372 US 335
the US Supreme Court held that:
" this Court has looked to the FUNDAMENTAL nature of original Bill of Rights
guarantees to decide whether the Fourteenth Amendment makes
them obligatory on the States. " [ emphasis added by David ]

In PLANNED PARENTHOOD v. CASEY (1992) 112 S.Ct. 2791 (P. 28O5)
the Supreme Court held that:
"All fundamental rights comprised within the term liberty are protected
by the federal Constitution from invasion by the states " [ emphasis added by David ]
therefore,
if the USSC holds that the right to keep and bear arms
is a FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, then it might be deemed to extend immunity
from gun control laws to each citizen and to every citizen anywhere and everywhere in America.
David