Are the Supreme Court’s big guns and abortions decisions intellectually consistent?

Are the Supreme Court's big guns and abortions decisions intellectually consistent?

The Supreme Court just upended “the most fiercely polarizing issues in American life: abortion and guns,” The Associated Press reports . On one day last month, the court’s conservative majority expanded the Second Amendment to guarantee the individual right to carry concealed handguns , and the next day, they removed the constitutional right to abortion enshrined for 50 years in Roe v. Wade . Among the many practical and political questions left in the wake of these two “momentous decisions,” AP says , is “whether the court’s conservative justices are being faithful and consistent to history and the Constitution — or citing them to justify political preferences.” In other words, is there some intellectual constancy in allowing states to ban abortion but forbidding them from regulating guns, or is the court’s emboldened 6-3 conservative majority just flexing its newfound ideological might? The Supreme Court conservatives are being consistent The conservative justices say they are consistently following a legal philosophy that relies on interpreting the text and original intent of the Constitution’s authors to decide today’s cases. When it comes to guns and abortion, “I understand how it might look hypocritical, but from the perspective of the conservative majority on the court, it’s a consistent approach to both cases,” University of Texas law professor Richard Albert tells AP . “I’m not saying it’s correct, by the way, but from their perspective, it is completely consistent and coherent.” “We can debate about the meaning of the Second Amendment, but the Second […]

Click here to view original web page at Are the Supreme Court’s big guns and abortions decisions intellectually consistent?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.