"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 06:52:53 -0800 (PST), Gerry
wrote:

Or the chance to totally screw it up with a fu'd decision like they
did with emminant domain a year ago.

What, decide that it's a state issue and no a federal one? I don't
think there's any chance of that.

What Slater said. The venue (D.C.) was chosen specifically so the basic
right could be decided without getting tangled in the problem of
incorporating it under the 14th Amendment. If they don't incorporate, it
remains as a prohibition only against the federal government -- assuming
they find for the individual right, that is.

However, if they do incorporate, they'll be accused of overreaching with
judicial activism because they'll have exceeded the needs of the case. Since
D.C. isn't a state, there's no direct need to decide the issue for the
states with this case.

That's exactly the kind of overreaching that judicial "conservatives" have
been blasting judicial "liberals" for, for decades. Personally, I don't
think it will bother them very much, because Scalia is a self-justifying
hypocrite, Thomas doesn't care, and Roberts, despite his mild demeanor, has
a wild streak that he keeps hidden most of the time.

--
Ed Huntress