Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Loudly

(2,436 posts)
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 01:15 PM Dec 2012

Is a "Sense of the Congress" interpretation of the 2A possible?

I know that SCOTUS has exclusive jurisdiction to tell us what the Constitution means.

Wonder if a majority of both chambers of the legislature could agree on a Sense of the Congress interpretation of the 2nd Amendment?

I.e., what's in there for? And what is its relevance to 21st century America?

9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
1. Would be nice to hear. Instead, NRA lawyers/lobbyists tell the right winger justices what to think.
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 01:17 PM
Dec 2012

bossy22

(3,547 posts)
2. be careful what you wish for
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 01:18 PM
Dec 2012

you might end up with a stricter interpretation in favor of gun ownership than the court has held. The majority of both chambers would probably end up with a pro-gun rights stance

 

graham4anything

(11,464 posts)
3. With the next 12 years, comes a brand new SCOTUS (Obama's 8 years, then Hillary or Kennedy)
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 01:19 PM
Dec 2012

and every 6 years a brand new senate
and every 2 a brand new house

with backing of anti-gun people it all can be done within 12 years

bossy22

(3,547 posts)
4. it probably won't
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 01:27 PM
Dec 2012

first it would require a huge shift in a public opinion. Even 9/11 did not cause a long term shift that great. You also assume that anti-gun people will outnumber pro-gun people. I'm not so sure that will be the case. You would have to make their pro-gun side an insignificant minority and that will be very hard to do- remember the jewish vote is considered important and there are less than 6 million of them in the U.S.. This is because they are a "loud", politically active minority- how can you not say that doesnt hold true for pro-gun people?

Also, if your theory held true, Roe V wade would have been gone atleast a decade ago- but it hasn't. Yes, there has been modifications but the supreme court did not completely overturn it. I have a feeling the same will hold for Heller and Mcdonald.

 

graham4anything

(11,464 posts)
6. Social media now trumps anything old. It is an unstoppable force
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 01:31 PM
Dec 2012

and there don't need to be change anyhow as the war on terror is ongoing and can incorporate basically anything

that is what congress already authorized

as the old thing said, that the Byrd's turned into a song (c)
"For every season turn turn turn"

the turning has begun

bossy22

(3,547 posts)
8. can you cite evidence?
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 01:52 PM
Dec 2012

Last time I checked both sides have been using social media quite effectively. In fact it can be argued that modern social media has lead to to the strength of the Pro-gun movement.

 

Spider Jerusalem

(21,786 posts)
5. You'd need to get rid of the strict constructionists on the Court first
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 01:30 PM
Dec 2012

since most of the Reagan/Bush I&II appointees have the peculiar notion that a literal interpretation of what was meant by the wording of the amendment in 1791 has any real relevance or meaning to its application to present-day society (in the case of "right to bear arms" and "well-regulated militia", at least, it's become increasingly clear that it probably doesn't).

 

graham4anything

(11,464 posts)
7. They are in their 70s.and the way the court is acting this year since reelection
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 01:34 PM
Dec 2012

I believe one of the heavies is thinking of hanging it up

knowing the Dems will remain in the presidency for at least 12 more years

Most likely Scalia, and when he retires so will Thomas.

I figure President Obama to appoint 3 more or 4

and Kennedy is getting up in age too

I then figure in the 45 realm, it will lead to Roberts retiring and that leaves only Alito remaining

It will be 8 to 1 or 7 to 2

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Is a "Sense of the C...