Too bad for Senator “Moran” Bunning and all his friends at the NRA. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg is not only still alive and kicking after surgery for pancreatic cancer, but she actually penned an opinion regarding gun control which convinced all but two of her Republican appointed colleagues to agree with her that people who abuse their spouses lose the right to own firearms:
The Supreme Court yesterday affirmed federal efforts to bar those convicted of crimes involving domestic violence from owning guns.
It was the court’s first decision concerning gun rights since last year’s landmark decision recognizing an individual’s Second Amendment right to own a firearm. But the 7 to 2 decision authored by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg contained nary a word about Heller v. District of Columbia, which struck down Washington’s ban on handguns. […]
The question was whether gun ownership was barred because someone had been convicted of a generic law against the use of force, or whether the law in question must specifically have as an element that the victim was in a domestic relationship with the aggressor.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit said it was the latter. It threw out the conviction of Randy Edward Hayes, who had been convicted of battery on his then-wife in 1994. Ten years later, police responding to a domestic violence call about Hayes and his girlfriend found firearms in the home and indicted Hayes.
Hayes said that the 1994 battery conviction did not trigger the federal ban on firearms, because it was not specifically on the charge of domestic violence.
But nine other circuits around the country had read the law the other way, and Ginsburg said they were right. Fewer than half the states have laws that specifically denominate domestic violence as an element of a crime.
Only Scalia and Chief Justice Roberts dissented. I guess they don’t mind if wife beaters can buy guns with which to threaten and/or murder their battered spouses and children. Way to show those family values, guys. Even Alito and Thomas, your fellow travelers on the right, don’t buy the argument that the second amendment is so unlimited it grants individuals with a known history of violence the right to bear arms (and please, dear commenters. no jokes about hairy armed men). Hell, even you guys didn’t try to argue that the Second Amendment is unlimited in scope (though I’m sure you would if you could find three other justices to agree with you).
Remember when McCain said he wanted to appoint more justices to the Supreme Court like Scalia? Well, thank god he is never going to get the chance now. And God bless Ruth Bader Ginsberg. May she live long and prosper, to quote a certain fictional alien humanoid species.
I don’t pay really close attention to the rulings of the court, but this is the first time I can recall Clarence Thomas casting a vote that didn’t piss me off.
He’s had a couple that were contrary to what you’d expect (still not a lot). Alito was the guy who surprised me. Before I read the article I was expecting a 5-4 vote with Kennedy the swing voter.
Alito and Roberts are still so new that I don’t have a good feel for when they might bolt from Scalia.
Ruth Ginsberg makes me feel proud to be an American. What a wonderful person she is.
.
U.S. Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) officially kicked off his efforts to secure an increased federal commitment to combating postpartum depression by reintroducing the Melanie Blocker Stokes MOTHERS Act in the Senate. Thank you for continuing to be so persistent and supportive of new mothers across this country, Senator Menendez. Thank you, thank you!!
The legislation, which is co-sponsored by Sens. Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME), has support from Senate leadership. It was nearing passage last year, despite being blocked from a vote on the Senate floor by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK), who has objected to this and other bills targeting specific diseases on ideological grounds.
Hit very close to home as my daughter suffered from PPD and had her marriage, home and son taken away by an ass…. lawyer husband with no scruples and backbone. Still one last chance before the court to have her re-united with her son of nearly three years old. This guy has all the characteristics of a dominant personality with coercive control. Previous fysical battery by men has been replaced by mental battery which can be hidden for a long time from family and friends.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Before you get all loopy…
“The question was whether gun ownership was barred because someone had been convicted of a generic law against the use of force, or whether the law in question must specifically have as an element that the victim was in a domestic relationship with the aggressor.”
I’m surprised this case was even taken by the court. And if Roberts and Scalia weren’t such nut jobs it would have been 9-0.
The intent of the law couldn’t have been more clear that it was to apply to cases of domestic violence whether you call it battery or something else.
But I’m glad Ginsberg is back and, for now, healthy.
Lautenburg might want to go back and tighten the language though.
It’s important because it tells us there are limits to what the Second amendment will allow. Based on their prior ruling on the DC gun ban it wasn’t clear what those limits were. It certainly wasn’t clear that Lautenberg’s amendment to the gun control act would survive scrutiny based on the opinion in the DC case.
The SC overturned the apellate court decision. Had they not taken the case, your prefered outcome would not have come to pass.
There is a an interesting post on Language Log concerning the ruling here