The 54 (or the occasional 43) decisions bring up questions of why there would be such a split vote. Given that all the justices are said to be accomplished attorneys, and that they all have presumably read and heard the same facts and law of a case, why did their conclusions differ? It should be so simple. The justices should just read the law, absorb the facts, listen to the oral arguments, and make the right decision.
That, of course, isn't life, given laws and facts are often imprecise, if not in dispute, and that humans, with all our differences, are involved in the analysis and voting.
This brings me to the raison d'etre of this work: the 54 vote of the consequential 2008 Supreme Court Heller decision. That decision found in the Second Amendment an individual right to arms for self-defense in the home, unconnected with the militia. Prior to that decision, no Supreme Court decision had ever found an individual right to arms in the Amendment.
I examined the decision and researched, with others helping, Colonial and founding-era documents, firearms laws and related material surrounding that decision. That examination and research culminated in this book showing why the Heller decision was not supported by the facts presented in its Opinion.
Dieser Download kann aus rechtlichen Gründen nur mit Rechnungsadresse in A, D ausgeliefert werden.