:: welcome to

NINOMANIA

:: A constitutional law blog by Scalia/Thomas fan David M. Wagner, M.A., J.D., Research Fellow, National Legal Foundation, and Teacher, Veritas Preparatory Academy. Opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect those of the NLF or Veritas. :: bloghome | E-mail me ::


"Scalialicious!"
-- Eve Tushnet


"Frankfurter was born too soon for the Web, but I'm sure that, had it been possible, there would have been the equivalent of Ninomania for Frankfurter."
-- Mark Tushnet
(I agree, and commented here.)


"The preeminent Scalia blog"
-- Underneath Their Robes


 Subscribe in a reader



Site Feed


Also please visit my opera blog, Box Five!

    follow me on Twitter



    Bloglinks:

    Above the Law, by David Lat

    Balkinization

    CrimLaw

    Duncan's Con Law Course Blog

    Eve Tushnet

    Eye of Polyphemus, by Jamie Jeffords

    How Appealing

    Hugh Hewitt

    Justice Thomas Appreciation Page

    Legal Theory Blog

    Lex Communis

    Opinio Juris

    Overlawyered.com

    Paper Chase (from JURIST)

    Point of Law (Manhattan Inst.)

    Professor Bainbridge

    Public Discourse

    Redeeming Law, by Prof. Mike Schutt

    SCOTUS Blog

    Volokh Conspiracy

    WSJ Law Blog





    Other fine sites:

    Alexander Hamilton Inst. for Study of Western Civilization

    Ave Maria School of Law

    Center for Thomas More Studies

    Family Defense Center

    The Federalist Society

    The Founders' Constitution

    George Mason University School of Law

    Immigration and Refugee Appellate Center

    Judged: Law Firm News & Intelligence

    JURIST

    Law Prose (Bryan Garner)

    Liberty Library of Constitutional Classics

    National Lawyers Association (alternative to ABA)

    Supreme Court decisions

    The Weekly Standard



    Something I wrote about marriage


    lawyer blogs


    [::..archive..::]
    ::

    :: Friday, March 09, 2007 ::
    Going great guns: In Parker v. Fenty, the D.C. Circuit (Silberman, Senior Circuit Judge, writing) has resoundingly adopted the individual-rights theory of the Second Amendment, long advocated enthusiastically by gun groups -- and reluctantly yet firmly by leading liberal scholars such as Sandy Levinson.

    Like the First Amendment, the court says, the Second allows for reasonable regulations of the rights that it protects -- but D.C.'s 1976 gun law isn't one of them

    In dissent, Bush I appointee Karen LeCraft Henderson scoffed at the notion that a court can resolve the academic debate, noting that the majority has just added x-number of pages to the "pile." Ewwww, "pile"!

    She also adopted the view that "the District of Columbia is not a state within the meaning of the Second Amendment," a view that could have interesting implications for Bolling v. Sharpe now that D.C. has "home rule," rather than the direct federal control that prevailed at the time of Bolling.

    Bolling, you'll recall, held that what the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Am. requires of the states, the Due Process clause of the 5th Am. requires of the federal government. But D.C. isn't run by the federal government any more; not directly, anyway. So, I would guess that in Judge Henderson's view, the coming of home rule to D.C. legalized segregated schools in the District, unless she can find, which I cannot, some reason why D.C. is not a "state" for 2nd Am. purposes but is one for the 14th.

    :: David M. Wagner 11:37 PM [+] ::
    ...

    Site Meter
    This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?