Skip to main content

View Diary: We Got Your Assault Weapons Ban Right Here (20 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Because I have no particular "side" in the (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tom Seaview, high uintas

    gun control question this is extremely interesting to me as a matter of process. If S.150 fails, as it very well may, this is entirely an academic exercise. Arizona state law will specifically allow something that no federal law forbids.

    Should a not too emasculated S.150 win passage, and HB 2431 succeed, there will be a conflict between state and federal law that would normally be a slam dunk Supremacy Clause issue. We in Arizona have funded literally millions of dollars in attorney's fees in the last few years proving that even the Roberts Court still finds that part of the Constitution operable.

    It's the framing of the state nullification of federal statute in the garb of a militia that makes this one something to watch. There were five votes to ignore the opening words of the 2nd Amendment in Heller. Would their be five votes to find them again for this law?

    “Perhaps the most 'spiritual' thing any of us can do is simply to look through our own eyes, see with eyes of wholeness, and act with integrity and kindness.” Jon Kabat-Zinn

    by DaNang65 on Sun Jan 27, 2013 at 02:32:17 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  What conflict? (4+ / 0-)

      What federal law preempts state and local governments from equipping law enforcement and defense forces?

      No nullification issue here at all.  Arizona would just have cleverly removed its population from the prohibited class of citizens.

      •  IANAL, but am somewhat familiar with (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        124NewYork, PSzymeczek

        courts looking past superficialities to get to the underlying reality.

        There is no Arizona State Guard. It's a paper construct with no members beyond the entire population except those specifically excluded; no funding; no budget; no employees, and no property.

        It does not exist except in the minds of those who find it convenient to claim it.

        Moreover, given that the proposed statute applies not only to actual members of this non-existent force, but to all persons "eligible" to be members it's hard to imagine that such exemption from federal law (should S.150 become law) could withstand challenge on the grounds of overbreadth.

        “Perhaps the most 'spiritual' thing any of us can do is simply to look through our own eyes, see with eyes of wholeness, and act with integrity and kindness.” Jon Kabat-Zinn

        by DaNang65 on Sun Jan 27, 2013 at 03:00:14 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  It does make it interesting (4+ / 0-)

      for the very reason you stated. In order for SCOTUS to find for AZ they would have to place some value on the militia part.

      I have long held that the first part of the amendment is/was serious, but that it is contingent on the second. You can't have a well regulated militia without a group of competent gun owners to pull from.

      And as for those who say that somehow the state can own the weapons that the militia can draw from, no. The 2nd states that the right is the individual's and is not to be fucked with.

      "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

      by high uintas on Sun Jan 27, 2013 at 03:26:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site