familiar with Wisconsin v Schultz?

[Anubis]

Congratulations!

From http://www.wisconsinappeals.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Schultz1.pdf :

In addition, as noted above, this court agrees with Justice Clarence Thomas’s McDonald concurrence and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to this matter. In essence, no State shall abridge the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States. As Justice Thomas demonstrates, the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right, not created by the Second Amendment, but secured or recognized by it. The right to keep and bear arms is therefore not to be abridged by any State law. Sec. 941.23 must also fail under the application of the Fourteenth Amendment.

In sum, sec. 941.23 is unconstitutional on its face as overly broad in violation of the Second and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.

Retain Judge Counsell!

 

[nogods]

Congratulations!

From http://www.wisconsinappeals.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Schultz1.pdf :



Retain Judge Counsell!

Uh, didn't 8 other SCOUTS justices disagree with him?

 

[nogods]

Thomas agreed with the majority that the second amendment was incorporated, albeit for different reasons than the majority.

I don't disagree with your dissertation on supreme court opinions (I've been admitted to the Supreme Court for more than 25 years and have filed petitions for cert and amicus briefs, but have never presented oral argument.)

But the above quote is the critical point. 8 other justices agreed that Thomas was wrong on his incorporation method. A state court or lower federal court that relies on Thomas's theory of incorporation is going to end up with an 8-1 reversal on that issue.

 

[[email protected]]

Uh, didn't 8 other SCOUTS justices disagree with him?

I guess I am confused? What does SCOTUS have to do with this? This WI district judge used the WI Constitution, the Heller and McDonald decisions to say, in effect, that since the WI Constitution guarantees the right to carry without harassment and that since 941.23 makes concealed carry illegal,, oc must occur without harassment. Since the Madison 5 got harassed just because they were oc'ing, therefore 941.23 is unconstitutional at the state level.

This hasn't been appealed so concealed carry is only legal in Jackson county, where this ruling was made.

 

[nogods]

I guess I am confused? What does SCOTUS have to do with this? T

Oh, I don't know..maybe this part:

this court agrees with Justice Clarence Thomas’s McDonald concurrence

 

[[email protected]]

Oh, I don't know..maybe this part:

Ahhh... OK.