The flood of speculation continues, with no shortage of misstatements and false humility. DC absolutely did argue the Collective Right position until the clearly evident predisposition by the Justices revealed the folly of pursuing that oral argument. Now, it is with a spirit of conciliation that they continue to champion their "reasonable regulation" fall back position. To whom do they offer this olive branch?
Are they hoping that the Justices still seek to connect and absorb from the parties in the suit? I pray not, but rather they are relying on their God given (dare I say that?) empathy with the actual human composition of our nation. No lawyers, no professors, no media screaming eagles, just "We, The People" at large. There is where the consent and consensus of the governed is to be found.
The Supreme Court has it easily and comfortably within their domain to do as most judicial bodies do as a matter of precedent. Dissect the particulars, find equity in both arguments, praise both parties for persevering with the resolution of a long simmering dispute, then meticulously award each party an equal portion of the contested prize. This is Mr. Roston's recommendation. But what an historic opportunity lost if that was the eventual outcome. The issues will never be clearer. The Founding Father's clarity of mind and purpose will be no more discernible than today.
If speculation is the game, I have no credentials to play. If hope for the future seen by our Forefathers is the issue, I would argue that the time is now, as never before or after, for an all or nothing, pro-Liberty ruling, setting the stage for the next hundred years of freedom in our land. May Mr. Roster find use for his olive branch to roast marshmallows over the piles of burning, unconstitutional, ineffective and oppressive regulations.
Mac.
MBTV
Forum Index
Help
Calendar
Contact Info
Register as a member
