Luma 7-4

Luma 7-4 (01:41)

Condensed (00:19)

D.C Voting Rights Act Dead

Some folks may remember last summer's dust-up over this. There was a bill before Congress to get the District of Columbia a seat in the House. John Ensign tacked the Second Amendment Enforcement Act onto it, and it became something of a poison pill. Democrats were unable to excise his amendment, and if the District was to get a house seat, they'd have to comply with the Heller ruling.

Rather than risk abandoning the District's unconstitutional and disastrous regulations, Congress chose to simply drop the whole matter completely.

Well, history repeats itself, though rarely this quickly. This year's version quickly found the Ensign amendment attached to it, and again Congress chose not to decide.

Paul Helmke's response was to gloat, calling the whole thing a "Faustian bargain" and voicing his pleasure that the District would be sticking to its guns, even if it cost them something advocates of DC statehood consider to be a huge priority.

It all raises a difficult question, however. What if Congress had chosen to pass the bill, with the Ensign amendment? Would it have been worth the compromise?

Washington DC isn't a state, and as such, they don't qualify for representation. The Supreme Court ruled as such twice, in District of Columbia v. Murphy (1941) and District of Columbia v. Carter (1973). Article I and Section 2 of the 14th Amendment only mention the states as being entitled to send representatives to the House.

Clearly, there's a need to enforce Heller in some way. The District is doing their best to ignore the constitutional rights of its citizens, as well as the ruling of the Supreme Court.  But would we be playing a little too fast and loose with the Constitution if we supported the Voting Rights Act to further the cause of the 2nd Amendment?

That's not a rhetorical question.  Do the ends justify the means, and do we risk making some Faustian deals ourselves?

Crosstalk over I-94

There's an area around Lake Erie where several commercial radio stations share the same frequency.  On a clear night, you can hear straight across to Canada as the signals bleed together.   For some people, it makes for annoying interference.  For others, the result ends up being something far more interesting than the sum of its parts.

Crosstalk over I-94  (02:10)

Crosstalk over I-94

There's an area around Lake Erie where several commercial radio stations share the same frequency.  On a clear night, you can hear straight across to Canada as the signals bleed together.   For some people, it makes for annoying interference.  For others, the result ends up being something far more interesting than the sum of its parts.

Crosstalk over I-94  (02:10)

Sunday Info Dump #2

My order from El Paso Saddlery arrived Friday, and here's their Tom Threepersons holster for the 3" Model 65:





I was pleasantly surprised by their turnaround time: just over four weeks.

In other news, Leonard Embody, Cassidy Nicosia and Kurk Kirby have a new compatriot in David Walters.

Justice Stevens and the New Balance

It turns out that this will be Justice Stevens' last term on the Supreme Court.  Even if we see one liberal Justice replaced with another, the ideological balance of the Court is unlikely to change.

At least, on the surface.

One of Stevens' strengths was building across-the-aisle consensus among dissenting Justices.  He was often able to corral or curtail Justice Kennedy's traditional swing vote, but a younger Justice will not have the ability to do so.  As such, Kennedy's role on the Court is about to become much more important.

His vote with the majority in the Heller decision showed a willingness to accept the 2nd Amendment at face value, and without anyone to sway him away, I'd guess we can expect him to rule in our favor in subsequent challenges.

I'm sure the 2nd Amendment will be a significant issue in confirmation hearings.  How much of an issue, I'm not sure.  After all, McDonald v. Chicago will likely be settled law one way or another at that point.  Still, Tom Coburn's on the committee, so expect to see nominees put on the hot seat about the matter.

The real 800lb gorilla in the room will be the Citizens United decision.  This one created a rather large political divide, including a histrionic and inappropriate reprimand from the President during this year's State of the Union address.  There are still lingering questions of corporate personhood and free speech tied up in the issue.

Then there's the spectre of the midterm elections.  A number of Democratic senators, some on the Judiciary Committee, see their jobs on the chopping block.  They're already taking heat for their blind support of the Health Care Reform Bill, and rushing an ultra-liberal Justice through the process isn't going to gain them any clout among constituents who are already seething at what they see as a far-left agenda.

For these folks, the midterm slogans will be characterized by words like "bipartisanship" and "moderate."  Traditional controversial issues like abortion, terrorism and judicial "activism" will be front and center.  If they've got any sense of political self-preservation, they'll do their best to confirm the most inoffensive candidate possible.

Which would be a win on several levels.