A double standard for judges on the Second Amendment?
Wikimedia Commons
On Friday, a candidate for to the federal bench nominated by President Barack Obama withdrew from consideration. Her name is Elissa Cadish and she’s a state judge in Nevada.
The nomination wasn’t going anywhere. Though recommended by Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, it was being blocked by Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nevada. Why?
From the Associated Press:
Heller took issue with Cadish’s response on a 2008 election season questionnaire about the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Cadish wrote that she did not believe it was a constitutional right.
Proababy the AP overgeneralized what she wrote on that questionnaire. What Cadish most likely wrote was that she did not believe there was an individual right to keep and bears arms under the Second Amendment.
Until 2008, with its 5-4 ruling in Heller, the U.S.. Supreme Court had pretty much held the same thing for 100 or so years. So such a statement would not at all have conflicted with mainstream legal thought. Previous to Heller, the court had considered that the right to keep and bear arms existed within the context of a “well-regulated militia,” another well-known phrase in the Second Amendment.
In spite of that, the five justices in the Heller majority who evidently believed there is an individual right to guns were still confirmed. Whatever beliefs they had expressed on the Second Amendment prior to their ascension to the Supreme Court were not viewed as any kind of disqualification.
Yet now, with a judge who had expressed the opposite opinion, it seems more or less taken for granted that it’s a disqualifying factor. Which means now we’ve got a new litmus test, and a double standard to boot.
March 8, 2013 - 5:00 PM
Give the second amendment a rest. You should move on up to New York and you’ll be much happier !!!
So? Sotomayor does not believe in the individual right and she was confirmed in 2009.
That’s right, John Wilburn. Thanks for helping me make my point.
There used to be no litmus test on that issue, one way or another. Now it seems like there is one.
Woody, I’m sticking around. Perhaps you should move to Mississippi!
Why Liberals should love the Second Amendment:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/07/04/881431/-Why-liberals-should-love-the-Second-Amendment
Rob,
I believe that’s the first item I’ve read in the Daily Kos. It was spot on.
The fact that Republicons in the Senate continue to block and filibuster Obama’s appointments, especially to the judiciary, borders on criminal negligence. 87 vacant positions in the federal court system keeps the pipeline clogged and massively delays justice.
Sotomayor should not have been confirmed, but then again, the president who appointed her should never have been elected. Our Constitution just isn’t very important to the vast majority of the public and it shows.
We are due to become more conscious of this, however, and that is at least part of what is happening.
If it’s not an individual right, what kind of right is it? What other rights are not individual rights?
Dan, I’ve lived in Mississippi, military service..USAF. Well, you wouldn’t know about that. Anyway, I don’t want to live there, but I resent people moving here and thinking they should tell us how to think!!! Every time I read your pap I am mad at myself. You can make a good point, but not often enough. I’ll never bother you again. Go hug Mayor Bower.
John Wilburn,
Since you brought it up, neither should Samuel Alito have been appointed nor the president who appointed him elected.
Ron May
Since you brought it up, neither should the president who appointed Alito have been appointed by unelected appointees.
“…nor the president who appointed him elected.”
He wasn’t, but that’s another story.
What other rights are not individual rights?
Collective rights, Henry, like the right to freedom from a poisonous environment. If you don’t understand the Bill of Responsibilities, you can’t understand the Bill of Rights, plain and simple. It’s the necessary corrective to the myth of American individualism.
Strange how none of you were whining about this when Senate Democrats were blocking Bush’s judicial appointees. Now it’s suddenly unfair and unjust?
You are correct, Chuck. Just go back and take a look see at William Jefferson Clinton’s obstructionist posture relative to the judicial appointments. It would be great if all of these high office politicians would do what is right for our country instead of what is right for their partisonship. I still blame the leftist marxist media in this country for perpetuating this twisted “blame the conservatives” attitude. We need more open mindedness but liberals, hollywooders and gays just won’t move outside of their demented boxes.
“Strange how none of you were whining about this when Senate Democrats were blocking Bush’s judicial appointees. Now it’s suddenly unfair and unjust?”
–Chuck
Chuck,
You do realize this blog was not around then, right? Anyway. . .In 8 years of Bush, the Democrats blocked 27 appeals court nominees and 23 district court judge nominee. In 4 years of Obama, the Republicans have blocked 87 judicial nominees.
And btw, the Democrats weren’t the only ones who block Bush nominees. Ever hear of Harriet Myers? She was done in by the GOP.
Blocking appointees, for the most part, is sour grapes, in my view. When a President is elected, he or she should not be hindered in appointing people to work within his or her administration. Blocking prospective appointees is contrary to good governance no matter which party does it, and when it severely impacts the judiciary as it is now, the People are denied expeditious justice. Great point Wayne at 8:27 p.m.
-
Not surprisingly, the People hurt most by a delay in justice are those who can least afford to purchase influence within the crimnal justice system.
So you can express an opinion as long as it agrees with the powers that be, but woe unto you if you an express an opinion that does not. Sounds familiar.
Yes Chuck, we are just that shallow, what is your excuse?
Liberals do love and agree with the second amendment (and all the others)! We just agree that gun control is also smart and constitutional.
FYI, The Daily Kos has hundreds of contributors, many of them are quite well informed and make excellent comentary.
“FYI, The Daily Kos has hundreds of contributors, many of them are quite well informed and make excellent comentary.”
–Sandi
Which is the perfect explanation for why Frank has never read anything there before.
John Wilburn | March 8, 2013 at 8:39 pm
Sotomayor should not have been confirmed, but then again, the president who appointed her should never have been elected. Our Constitution just isn’t very important to the vast majority of the public and it shows.
We are due to become more conscious of this, however, and that is at least part of what is happening.
Sounds like a not too veiled reference to the bat guano crazy militia groups who think they are getting geared up to overthrow the government to preserve their right to shoot whoever they want to whenever they want to..
What we need is easier access to guns so that we have at least two in every car and a few dozen more at home and at least two concealed on our person at all times
.http://news.yahoo.com/virginia-trooper-killed-85-shooting-001139519.html
To Woody who has suggested that Dan leave, on the theory that he (Woody) is sick of people moving here and having a different opinion that the majority, I would simply say that I have lived here 49 years and I welcome Dan to our area. His voice and a few others like him are the only alternative most thinking people have in this otherwise backwards and politically ignorant local majority. His column is one of the first things I look for when I walk out my long driveway to pick up the morning paper. Keep it up Dan. As I said prior to November 2012, there is a silent (or simply less loud) coalition out there that would come out to re-elect our President and just because these teabaggers typically have the megaphone, doesent’ make their blather any more correct or acceptable.
“I still blame the leftist marxist media in this country for perpetuating this twisted “blame the conservatives” attitude. We need more open mindedness but liberals, hollywooders and gays just won’t move outside of their demented boxes.”
Kendra hon, without people like you and your “liberals, hollywooders and gays” stupidity, the “leftist Marxist media” wouldn’t have so much material to work with. People like you are what prove them right, every day. They thank you!
#24…..Finally…a liberal that makes some sense.
Gaze into the mirrors, liberal posters….Hypocrites as far as the eye can see. Your whining is comforting.
I`m quite surprised that Dan and the RT didn`t try to suppress this fact….that `ol pesky `truth` can really screw things up for you libs…heh ? Speak the TRUTH boldly people…it WILL prevail…always has, always will.
” I still blame the leftist marxist media in this country for perpetuating this twisted “blame the conservatives” attitude. We need more open mindedness but liberals, hollywooders and gays just won’t move outside of their demented boxes.”
Open minded like Rush Limbaugh and the Tea Party devotees?
“I`m quite surprised that Dan and the RT didn`t try to suppress this fact….”
–Awood
Awood, I’m sure that you’re frequently surprised as you walk through life, given the misinformation you regularly spout here. Tell us, is reality a cold hard slap, or a slower burn? Does it smack you once a day? More frequently?
Reality is just a constant with me, Dan…I live with it day-in and day-out. You ought to try it sometime. I`ll grant you one thing, its not always easy, but I can handle it, unlike you obviously. The `ol “Spend more than you bring in“ comes to mind. Now that, my friends, is just good `ol down-home completely `out of touch with reality` camp. Anyone for a chorus of Kum beh yah before we braid our daisies ?
Well said, Earl K!
Oh, and Dan ??? While we wait, would you please list ALL of the `misinformation` that you speak of in post #31 ? You see, I`m a perfectionist and would feel much better about myself if I could correct the `misinformation`….would certainly hate to misinform anyone. Also, `espouse` would have been much more pallatable than `spout` coming from the `Prince of the paper`. We`re waiting.
She said what she said, it’s not up to you to determine what she meant. You don’t know, you just want to turn it so it means what you want it to mean, but she said what she said. She doesn’t deserve to hold the office, Leave the people alone. Get government out of our lives. Give us a break from all the crap. Why does the constitution give us the right the bear arms, and what is the mean reason people do? To protect ourselves from the government, particularly the one we have presently. And it never hurts to be able to defend yourself from the danger on today’s streets that our judicial system doesn’t deal with, or doesn’t want to. But we are more politically correct, isn’t that comforting?
Which brand of reality is a constant with you, Awood? Is that the one that puts words in the mouths of Thomas Jefferson, that he never said? The one that helps you confuse statements uttered by Machievelli with something you want to believe Saul Alinsky said?
I mean, come on. You’ve got zero credibility here.
“Oh, and Dan ??? While we wait, would you please list ALL of the `misinformation` that you speak of in post #31 ? You see, I`m a perfectionist and would feel much better about myself if I could correct the `misinformation`….would certainly hate to misinform anyone. Also, `espouse` would have been much more pallatable than `spout` coming from the `Prince of the paper`. We`re waiting.”
–Awood
Hey gang — I’m on the road this morning. Anyone care to help out Awood by listing the misinformation he’s sputtered here?
It is so amusing to watch liberalism disintegrate right before my eyes. Dan and Queenie, I’m surprised you are here, I though you’d be with J. Jackson attending Chavez’s funeral. Say Hi! to Mr. Peanut for us! Have a great day!
PS Dan, the NRA still doesn’t care about you!
I`m not seeking a `credibility` rating from you, Dan….You have none yourself. And you say that I misquoted Thomas Jefferson ? If that is true, I`m sure that it was completely and utterly `earth-shattering` for you. Didn`t mean to tear your world apart……I also see that you appealed to the `gang` to back you up….imagine that.
In fact, Earl K, your post reminds me of a story. A few years ago, a colleague from the upper Northwest corner of the US traveled to Gettysburg, PA for a leadership conference based on Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address. My well-educated, smart colleague was an agency executive of a federal court unit. Other agency executives from the North, South, East, and West attended the conference. During the introductions, she introduced herself as Jane Doe from Washington State. Someone in the room mumbled, “Yankee.”
She called me later in the day, perplexed by such a label. I explained that, even though the Civil War ended some 145 years ago, some from this region of the country still harbor ill will toward “the North.” She protested that Washington State was not part of the Union. Again, I had to explain that such historical and geographic facts were of no consequence. If you weren’t part of Civil War South, you were – and are – a Yankee.
I am proud of my Southern heritage and consider Gen. Robert E. Lee to be one of the finest Americans of any era. I am a native of Roanoke, and but for 4-5 years, have lived and worked in this wonderful Valley – by choice. But I realized long ago that there is a world rich with culture and intelligence and diversity outside the South, and I resolved long ago to expose myself and my children to these riches.
I know it is hard for some to believe that a Roanoke native, with roots running deep into the Tazewell County coal fields, grew up to be a “libbieprog.” All that means, folks, is there is still hope for most of you!
#30…Blue John….I`m going to the Zoo soon and hope to see one of your kind in captivity…I mean, how exciting to be able to actually see one up close….“This way, ladies and gentlemen…Now, in this cage we have a VERY RARE species..only one known in captivity“…“I introduce to you the unprecedented “Citizen who loves higher taxes“….“Not too close, folks…you wouldn`t want to catch what this THING has“.
#40….You are the extreme `exception` as opposed to the `rule`. I feel sure the good people of Tazewell are extremely proud of you. Your endoctrination obviously came in College.
Great story Jason. Like you I have lived in this area (SWVA) except for the three years I was away in law school. I am thankful for the Roanoke Times and their willingness to present both sides and an occasional liberal slanting op ed, but for these teabaggers and neo-cons to declare it to be a “liberal rag” is simultaneously incorrect and honorable to those that write for it. BTW when I was in law school down in the deep south of Louisiana, I was referred to by the locals as “the Yankee from Virginia.”
Who is Queenie?
I can’t get over Awood calling himself a “perfectionist”, considering the unmitigated nonsense and incorrect attributions with which he regularly papers the blog. Life must be tough as a “perfectionist” who is always wrong.
The opposite of progressive is regressive, so I’m always amused by those who consider the term progressive, bad.
Probably the voice in his head, Debbie.
Only part of their hypocrisy Chuck, wait, it’ll get better…sandi will blow her ‘kool’ at some point soon…lol, libbies sure are funny, and stupid..but mostly funny
+1, Kristen.
No excuses Sandi. Just pointing out that you were deathly silent when Senate Democrats did the same thing to Bush. Like it or not, this is how the system is. Presidents always try to appoint judges with whose politics they agree. It may be more of a partisan trip through the mud since the Clarence Thomas hearings, but the opposing party always try to prevent the president from packing the court with judges who share a specific political ideology. It’s ugly and it slows things down and with the modern media it has often degenerated into a ratings-based sideshow. However, it is a game that liberals perfected. Dan and the other liberals’ whining about it now does nothing other than to shine a huge spot light on their own hypocrisy.
Chuck, you’re wrong again! Your consistency is amazing. This blog didn’t exist when GWB was president. Besides that, the dems back then blocked FAR fewer of Bush’s nominations in 8 years than the RWers already have blocked in Obama’s first 4.
Saturday morning must be recreation and computer access time in lala land. Somebody let wood find a keyboard again
we have better reasons for blocking them danny
‘progressive’ has been used by commies for a long time deariedoo, have you even heard of history, you might go look that up sweetpea
“Sandi Saunders | March 8, 2013 at 11:01 pm
So you can express an opinion as long as it agrees with the powers that be, but woe unto you if you an express an opinion that does not. Sounds familiar.”
it should sound familiar sandidoo, it’s just like you
#34 Good god, Awood, you have been proven factually wrong over and over and over. When it’s pointed out you ignore it or claim it means nothing. That’s perfectionism???
Hmmm, pammala can’t even follow Dan’s simple request to call people by heir chosen blog names. Poor dear.
@41,
Come on down Awood. Leave a donation if you can, I don’t mind paying my fair share to improve my country, or the zoo for that matter. Problem is, those large cages housing corporate jet tax deductions and big oil subsidies overshadow the little guys. We’re in the back, next to the rabbits.
yes pammela, thank goodness libs are funny! laughter is the best medicine, and we sure get to laugh a bunch whenever we see the garbage they share amongst themselves, or the incessant braying they send our way!
and, i agree with you about sandi. give her a little time, and she will let loose with a whopper! don’t be sipping some coffee when she does!
Re: Dan Casey | March 8, 2013 at 10:39 pm
True.
However, Chuck’s basic point was that for years & years nominees have been stopped for their earlier decisions on other hot button issues.
One of the constant debates in judicial circles addresses the responsibility of v. authority of lower courts to go (or not go) further than the well established jurisprudence on the question of constitutionality and other types of “judicial activism” question/issues. Both wings have played the game.
Although it is akin to the old saws “…. We established what you are. Now we are just haggling over price” or “being a little bit pregnant”, Dan is right about the impact of the well established both wings’ partisan blocking of appointments leading to worst vacancy rate in history.
Good article on that issue in the Boston Globe http://tinyurl.com/bcte3ld
**
As Obama, Senate collide, courts caught short
The partisan deadlock in Washington hits much more than budgets. More than ever, judicial picks are ideological cannon fodder.
WASHINGTON — Just a few blocks from the US Supreme Court sits what is widely considered to be the nation’s second most important judicial body.
But unlike its senior sibling, which has a full slate of judges, including two appointments made by President Obama, the US Court of Appeals for District of Columbia Circuit is fundamentally broken in ways that are rippling across Washington and the country.
It has only seven out of 11 judges, the worst vacancy rate in its history and higher than any other federal circuit court nationwide. Obama has never been able to get a nominee on the court, symbolizing the Senate’s failure to approve nominations to dozens of courts nationwide. As a result, four years after Obama took power in the White House, Republican appointees still hold a 4-to-3 majority over those named to the court by Democratic presidents, and that has resulted in a series of conservative rulings that affect the lives of millions of Americans.
SNIP
**
#59 “i agree with you about sandi. give her a little time, and she will let loose with a whopper!”
When it comes to “let[ting] loose with a whopper,” Sandi’s got nothing on you, Frank.