EYEWITNESS REPORT
Mar. 1, 2010 (Late)

I’m back in my hotel, having endured the weather in front of the U.S. Supreme Court, anticipating oral arguments in McDonald v. Chicago in the a.m., the case that will decide the standing of our Second Amendment rights in the 50 states.

Well, people are lining up all right. Young people who can withstand it.

It’s bitter cold with a 20 MPH wind, but if you’ve decided to come here for the latest most seminal gun-rights case imaginable that’s not going to stop you.

At 5PM when I arrived (night before the oral argument) there were eight people awaiting seats for tomorrow’s McDonald v. Chicago 14th Amendment/Second Amendment case. By the time I left, with my feet too numb to feel, there were thirteen people trickled in, including a GW law-school student and her Mom who brought an air matress and a comforter. When I cell-phoned some of the stalwarts later, before beginning this draft, I was told there were nearly 50 people there, including 15 or so high-school students who decided to rough it and see a landmark case at the Supreme Court. Only 50 are guaranteed seats, so the window of opportunity is pratically closed. The Marshall’s office expected the crowd to develop in the a.m., looks like they’ll be SOOL. Coulda been worse — for Heller, the line started TWO days ahead of time. This night-before stuff is child’s play. But it’s COOOOOLD.

As usual, the hale and hearty on line are more knowledgable about this case
than most of the public and the media. Wash Post made their above-the-fold front-page story today a referendum on Justice Scalia, read like an unsavory biography (they don’t like the guy!), instead of the merits of the case; what facts Court reporter Robert Barnes did provide were out of whack, thin, misleading, pretty standard for that rag. Guess what they chose for an illustration — a picture of Chirs Broughton carrying his AR-15 at the Obama rally in Phoenix!! I kid you not. That makes sense, right? The Wash Compost’s idea of a gun image is a months old piece of discriminatory controversy, not something depicting basic human rights.

We had dynamic chats on the street about the premise of the case (the Post barely touched it), constitutional realities, the unknowns, the likely outcomes, the vote — Mike the blogger, incredibly knowledgable and with past cases at his fingertips with such detail and a tongue too fast even for me to follow, predicts a 9 -0 result — the Court will not overrule its Heller jurisprudence, and even hopelessly anti-gun-rights Ginsburg will forgo her hatred of 2A to reintstate 14A, or so he believes. Robert Cumberland flew in from California and is first in line — and he knows his stuff. This case affects him more than even Heller — that case set the groundwork, but this is the one that might actually force reinstatement of his abrogated rights, and he wants to be here to see it.

The carnival atmosphere is definitely lacking. There isn’t a single camera crew set up — at Heller there were dozens at this point, but no doubt there will be some tomorrow. Yet this case stands to have more net effect than Heller, it just doesn’t break ground in the same way. Dick Heller was out there after I left (phone tips from the folks I met, seven men and one woman), chatting up the crowd, enjoying his 15 years of fame. His nephew plans to be on line to see the proceedings, some guy named Robert is holding a place in line in the freezing cold for a party unnamed, at $20 an hour. Dan Schmutter, attorney for JPFO dropped by to see what’s up. This is definitely the hot ticket in town — all seats in Chambers are reserved, save for the precious few for the rabble (what we call the public).

Perhaps the most telling perspective came from a British theology professor visiting here, met in a bar on the frigid way home — he thinks the only rights you legitimately have are those the government gives you. You can have a gun if government “allows” it, with no ammo, locked in a locker, and this is freedom. If he was on the Court we’d be doomed. I’m not making this up.

Exhausted, need to pack, will observe tomorow and provide my observatiosn soon. Real soon.

Alan.

PS. Remember: In Heller, when we waited with bated breath for the bottom-line result we wanted to hear “Affirmed.” And we did. In this case, we’re rooting for “Reversed.” That means the lower court decision supporting Chicago’s gun-rights denial, which is being challenged here, is overturned.

The McDonald v. Chicago petitioners website, with background:
Chicago Gun Case

The amicus brief joined by Bloomfield Press:
BLOOMFIELD PRESS McDonald v. Chicago amicus curiae brief

Background on all Supreme Court Gun Cases:
Supreme Court Gun Cases

My initial summary and press release on the issues:  here.

Every amicus brief filed:  here.

Supreme Court official website

[Editor's note: Dr. Robert Cumberland, a California chemist, has been pressing the California Attorney General about discrepancies in the definitions and descriptions of "assault weapons" for at least ten years.]

Tomorrow oral arguments begin in McDonald v. City of Chicago, an effort to overturn a ban on guns in the city of Chicago. Here is some background reading.

All eyes on Supreme Court Tuesday for Chicago gun ban showdown by Dave Workman:

Two years ago, attorney Alan Gura stood before the U.S. Supreme Court to argue a landmark firearm civil rights case – District of Columbia v. Dick Anthony Heller – that would ultimately lead to the high court’s definition of the Second Amendment as protective of an individual right.

Tomorrow morning – call it “Black Tuesday” for gun prohibitionists, if one is to believe the court prognosticators – Gura will once again be standing before the court, arguing that the City of Chicago’s handgun ban is unconstitutional and should be struck down, and that the Second Amendment should be incorporated to the states through the 14th Amendment. If the court majority once again agrees with his arguments, it will be the next major step in reversing more than 100 years of gun rights erosion that some say began with the “Black Codes” in the Reconstruction South and the notorious “Deadline” laws in Old West cattle towns, to say nothing of the abysmal Sullivan Law in New York….

Second Amendment drama: Act II by Lyle Denniston:

At 10 a.m. Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear one hour of oral argument in McDonald, et al., v. Chicago, et al. (08-1521). Alan Gura of Gura & Possessky in Alexandria, Va., will argue for four Chicago-area residents and two gun rights groups, followed by Paul D. Clement of King & Spaulding in Washington with 10 minutes for the National Rifle Association. James A. Feldman, as a special assistant to the Chicago corporation counsel, will argue for the cities of Chicago and Oak Park, Ill….

On the day 20 months ago that the Supreme Court decided the historic case of District of Columbia v. Heller, declaring that the Second Amendment provides an individual right to have a gun for private use, the first of an expected swarm of follow-up lawsuits was filed to test just how far that right will extend. That same-day sequel has now reached the Court, raising a misleadingly simple question: must state, county and city governments obey that Amendment for the first time in the 219 years it has been a part of the Constitution? The outcome will affect many more gun control laws than Heller itself did. By one estimate, some 90 million people in the U.S. have guns — 200 million of them — and most of those are regulated more by state and local laws than by federal laws….

Gun case on way to Supreme Court creates strange bedfellows:

Otis McDonald, 76, lives in Morgan Park, a tough Chicago neighborhood where the same youngsters who used to shoot hoops in his back yard are now threatening his life.

A law-abiding citizen, McDonald wants to keep a handgun in his home to protect himself against gangs but that’s against Chicago’s gun-control laws.

“The people who want to control me, my family, my property — these are the people who I want to protect myself from,” McDonald told the Chicago Tribune.

McDonald’s attempt to keep and use his weapon lawfully has been rejected by the trial court and the 7th U.S. Court of Appeals, both of which ruled in favor of the city. The U.S. Supreme Court takes up the issue Tuesday in McDonald vs. Chicago….

Gun rights case likely to be landmark Supreme Court ruling:

Regardless of who prevails, the case of McDonald vs. Chicago figures to be a landmark in the history of the 2nd Amendment and its “right to keep and bear arms.” It will decide whether the 2nd Amendment applies only to federal gun laws or if it can be used across the nation to strike down state and local gun restrictions.

A ruling overturning the Chicago ordinance would open the door to gun rights suits nationwide. “You will see a wave of lawsuits against state and local gun laws. This is just the first shot in a broad-based gun rights offensive,” said Dennis Henigan, a lawyer for the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in Washington.

The city’s lawyers say firearms have been regulated throughout American history — and without interference from federal judges. In the 1770s, Boston, Philadelphia and New York prohibited discharging a gun within the city. Even in the Wild West, cattle towns like Dodge City, Kan., required cowboys to turn in their guns.

But defenders of the 2nd Amendment say their goal is to restore the “right to keep and bear arms” to its proper place as a constitutional right….

Revive ‘privileges or immunities’:

One of the biggest cases the U.S. Supreme Court will decide this year involves the right to bear arms. But in the long run, its decision in McDonald v. Chicago may be far more important to America’s entrepreneurs. It all depends on whether the justices decide to revive a constitutional provision it has neglected for more than a century.

When it was ratified in 1868, the 14th Amendment added several revolutionary new provisions to the Constitution, barring states from violating the “privileges or immunities” of citizens, or taking anyone’s life, liberty or property without “due process of law,” or depriving people of the “equal protection of the laws.” But the first time it heard a case under that amendment — in the 1873 Slaughterhouse Cases — the Supreme Court basically erased the privileges or immunities clause, dramatically limiting the way the federal government would protect people against wrongful acts by state officials….

Today Patrick Kennedy, youngest son of the late Senator Ted Kennedy, announced that he will not run for re-election to the US House of Representatives from Rhode Island’s 1st district. His sixteen years in that seat were plagued by mental illness and alcoholism, but he morphed those negatives into a political career as an advocate in Congress for fellow citizens who shared those afflictions.

The reason he gave for ending his career in government, eloquently articulated by Rhode Island Monthly, was a change of heart about life goals brought on by his father’s recent death. Die-hard Kennedy fans likely believe that.

The rest of us note that he was behind in the polls, and conclude that he decided to go out as a perennial winner rather than run and lose. It’s a smart choice — no point in spending a lot of money on a campaign and getting nothing for it, when the outcome is fairly certain.

Upon learning of Scott Brown’s election to the Massachusetts senate seat formerly held by his father, Patrick Kennedy called the election of Brown “a joke.” That typical Kennedy arrogance is no longer popular with the voters. A recent poll “shows the eight-term incumbent with a 56 percent unfavorable rating in his district and a 62 percent unfavorable rating statewide.” The joke is on him.

Aerial photos of the 9-11 destruction shot from a police helicopter have just been released. Only these police photographers were allowed in the airspace above the collapsing twin towers that day. ABC news filed a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain the pictures from the government.

To view the slideshow, go here:

Aerial 9-11 Photos

Wearing purple SEIU shirts, some union members are demonstrating for Scott Brown!!!! Unbelievable!!!

And they are making a clear distinction between themselves and the flunkies who are getting paid by the Dems to carry signs.

Perhaps they are angry about the new tax on their health insurance plans that Congress negotiated on Thursday. Or perhaps they are still our labor force of patriotic Americans who favor democracy over socialism as the engine of job growth.

Panic at the Democratic disco?

Riding a wave of opposition to Democratic health-care reform, GOP upstart Scott Brown is leading in the U.S. Senate race, raising the odds of a historic upset that would reverberate all the way to the White House, a new poll shows.

Although Brown’s 4-point lead over Democrat Martha Coakley is within the Suffolk University/7News survey’s margin of error, the underdog’s position at the top of the results stunned even pollster David Paleologos.

“It’s a Brown-out,” said Paleologos, director of Suffolk’s Political Research Center. “It’s a massive change in the political landscape.”

The poll shows Brown, a state senator from Wrentham, besting Coakley, the state’s attorney general, by 50 percent to 46 percent, the first major survey to show Brown in the lead. Unenrolled long-shot Joseph L. Kennedy, an information technology executive with no relation to the famous family, gets 3 percent of the vote. Only 1 percent of voters were undecided.

Democrats are sweating buckets! Who knows how this will turn out, but it sure is fun to watch them squirm.

If this guy pulls this off its gonna rock the start of a wave of energy through the Conservative base. I’m seeing a lot of people already excited about the prospects of 2010 and taking back some power from the loonies. What better way to start than to get Brown elected so he can put a stake in the heart of Obamacare.

How can we feel confident about Janet Napolitano sitting in such a responsible job as homeland security?

Let’s be fair: It’s hard to connect the dots! And it’s always easier to be the Monday morning quarterback!

Nevertheless, how can we feel confident about Janet Napolitano sitting in such a responsible job? After all, what exactly were her qualifications? Beyond that, how can this woman continue to make such foolish statments?

Please read this from Ed-M’s post and watch this video further down:

“SECRETARY NAPOLITANO: I think, following up on that, not just the determination of al Qaeda and al Qaeda Arabian Peninsula, but the tactic of using an individual to foment an attack, as opposed to a large conspiracy or a multi-person conspiracy such as we saw in 9/11, that is something that affects intelligence.

It really emphasizes now the renewed importance on how different intelligence is integrated and analyzed, and threat streams are followed through.

And, again, it will impact how we continue to review the need to improve airport security around the world.”

Again, how can this woman keep her job?

So Janet Napolitano said that

“…the tactic of using an individual to foment an attack, as opposed to a large conspiracy or a multi-person conspiracy such as we saw in 9/11…”

She just learned that? She just learned that Al Qaeda would use an individual terrorist versus a group of terrorists?

Again, we understand that this is a hard war and mistakes will be made. However, we expect some competence, specially in key positions. It’s time for Pres BO to get a serious person at Homeland Security.

Here is the video:

P.S Last, but not least, this is great:

True liberals never let the facts get in the way of their hypotheses — even when those facts are in-your-face. So they are pushing their “global warming” agenda undaunted. Meanwhile…

From the London Telegraph — Britain braced for heaviest snowfall in 50-years:

The heaviest snowfall in almost 50 years is hitting parts of Britain as Arctic weather brought nationwide chaos.

As the country was plunged into one of its worst winters for decades, the Met Office issued an emergency weather warning for all counties of the UK….

From USA Today — Frigid temps break winter weather records:

Bitterly cold air and howling winds spread across the USA — from the Dakotas to Florida— over the weekend, breaking weather records in the upper Midwest, the Great Lakes and New England.

The wintry blast even shocked International Falls, Minn., the self-described “Icebox of the Nation,” where temperatures bottomed out at 37 below zero Saturday and Sunday mornings, breaking records that have stood since 1979….

Just saying…

The devisive socialization of health care is not yet law, but the White House has begun its push to give citizenship to twelve million illegal aliens. This is not about altruism or reasoned public policy. It is purely political, a move to solidify the Latino vote for the Democratic party. From the Los Angeles Times — White House prepares for immigration overhaul battle:

With the healthcare battle still unfinished, the Obama administration has been laying plans to take up an issue that could prove even more divisive — a major overhaul of the nation’s immigration system.

Senior White House aides privately have assured Latino activists that the president will back legislation next year to provide a path to citizenship for the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants living in the United States….

In an effort to enlist the kind of business support that helped drive its healthcare initiative, for example, administration officials have reached out to the National Restaurant Assn., which represents an industry that employs thousands of immigrants. Earlier this year, the new head of the association, Dawn Sweeney, met with Cecilia Muñoz, a White House aide involved in the issue, and expressed interest in cooperating….

No one anticipates that a core element of the Democratic base will defect to the Republican Party in November. But even a significant drop in turnout — which often happens in nonpresidential elections — could frustrate Democratic efforts to preserve their congressional majority.

“The bulk of the people needing immigration reform are Latino,” said Rep. Raul M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.). “There’s a level of disenchantment about where we’re going. . . . And if you don’t give the Latino community a reason to participate [in the elections], you weaken your base even more.”….

Every hand will be needed for this battle — writing, emailing, calling, faxing, and ultimately voting. Stay informed. Get involved. Make your voice heard.

Barack Hussein Obama cares deeply about all of his subjects … really. But while you are all struggling with rising unemployment and foreclosures, he will be spending two weeks with his family in Hawaii in a $4000 per night beachfront mansion that he is interested in buying. Take the tour: