More Constitutional "Changes"

The U.S. Supreme Court has struck down the D.C. gun ban, holding that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms (District of Columbia v. Heller). The Court's opinion is here.

The vote was 5-4, and of course, Justice Kennedy was the deciding vote for the majority, just like he was yesterday in the case striking down capital punishment for child rape (Kennedy v. Louisiana). In Kennedy, Justice Kennedy (no relation) joined with Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer to produce a ruling that Senators John McCain and Barack Obama both roundly condemned. In Heller, Justice Kennedy joined with Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito.

We can expect McCain to hail today's decision. It will be fascinating to see what position Obama takes. Given that he's into constitutional "change" (Obama flip-flopped on the constitutionality of capital punishment), perhaps Obama will agree that Americans have Second Amendment individual rights also.  Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.

McCain Gets It

John McCain reassured conservatives (and anyone else who doesn't want to be killed by a terrorist) that he rejects the U.S. Supreme Court's decision that enemy combatants can assert the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens. McCain called the 5-4 decision "one of the worst" decisions in our country's history.

McCain noted that the Court's opinion reminds us of the importance of a president selecting judges who interpret the law rather than legislate from the bench. Justice Anthony Kennedy went beyond usurping Congress's right to make legislation; Kennedy amended the Constitution itself by judicial fiat.

I've been reading David McCullough's John Adams recently and was struck by how little respect Kennedy showed for the Framer's conception of government. Adams and most other Framers understood our government to derive its authority from the consent of the governed. How on earth an enemy combatant, captured in another country and imprisoned beyond our borders, can be understood to have consented to our form of government -- so to take advantage of the rights it affords -- makes no sense.

Kennedy, moreover, has played a bait and switch with Congress, by encouraging Congress to pass the very laws that he then turned around and struck down.

Justice Antonin Scalia, in dissent, is doubtless right. The Court's decision makes us more vulnerable to terrorist attack. People will die as a result, and not just Americans.

Perhaps the most macabre aspect of the majority opinion is the perverse incentives it gives our military when fighting jihaadists, to either kill or release enemy combatants. Our military can hardly risk taking an enemy combatant prisoner, because to do so would give the terrorist a tactical advantage in destroying America by demanding his newly-found right to view our national security data. So Kennedy unwittingly has encouraged our military to take no prisoners.

The Supreme Court opinion serves to remind conservative voters that regardless of their lack of enthusiasm for McCain, any justice whom he would nominate would be better than a Barrack Obama nominee. Obama, after all, might try to put Hillary Clinton on the Court just to keep her from running against him in 2012.

The Supremes Come To Kentucky's Rescue

In an ironic twist, Kentucky benefited from a smack down of the Commonwealth's highest court by the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday. The nation's highest court reversed a Kentucky Supreme Court ruling that had held unconstitutional the Commonwealth's tax exemption of Kentucky-issued, but not out-of-state, municipal bonds. The benefit for Kentuckians from the U.S. Supreme Court ruling is that it gives governmental entities in Kentucky a leg up over out-of-state governments in attracting capital for public projects, such as the new basketball arena being built in Louisville.

Also, as The Motley Fool explains:

Had the decision gone the other way, it would likely have roiled the municipal bond market. States would likely have concluded that if they couldn't collect taxes just on muni bonds issued out-of-state, they'd have to get rid of the interest exemption entirely. That would've instantly led to higher interest rates, lowering the value of muni bonds in high-tax states. Bond fund shares -- especially those of the more than $150 billion in funds that focus on bonds from single states -- could have suffered a huge drop as a result.

The ultimate result likely would have been higher interest rates for municipal bond projects, which, in turn, would increase the costs of such endeavors.

The big media story involving Kentucky this week concerns, of course, yesterday's primary. But perhaps the most important event this week -- the municipal bonds ruling -- was buried in the business section. Funny how the news is reported.

Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.

Kentucky's Lethal Injection Statute Is Constitutional

By a vote of 7-2, the Supreme Court just upheld against constitutional challenge Kentucky's method for execution of death row prisoners by lethal injection. However, as the Associated Press reports, the majority opinion, written by Chief Justice Roberts, "did leave open subsequent challenges to lethal injection practices if a state refused to adopt an alternative method that significantly reduced the risk of severe pain." The Court's opinion in the case, Baze v. Rees, is available here.

Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.