Supremes Do Good Again

Since most people favor gun rights, leftist politicians have found the gun control advocacy to be a loser. Therefore, some state and local governments have attempted a back-door approach to eliminate our second amendment rights by suing the gun manufacturers out of business.

This is a ridiculous because it violates one of the primary principles of law: Proximate cause. If I take some matches and burn down your house, should you have a cause of action against the company that manufactured the matches?

Back in 2005, the US congress passed, and Bush signed, a law to protect gun manufacturers against these ridiculous lawsuits. New York City decided they didn't like the law and tried to go ahead with their frivolous suit anyway:

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- New York City on Monday failed before the U.S. Supreme Court to revive a lawsuit it filed against the gun industry.
New York sued several gun manufacturers in 2000, arguing the companies violated a state public nuisance law with their marketing and distribution of the firearms products they sell. Among the companies sued were Beretta USA Corp., Smith & Wesson Holding Corp. (SWHC), Colt's Manufacturing Co. LLC, Sturm, Ruger & Co. (RGR) and Glock GmbH.
A federal law enacted in 2005 sought to shield gun makers from lawsuits like the one New York filed, prompting a federal judge to throw the case out. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York in April 2008 upheld that ruling by a 2-1 vote.
New York, in a court brief, said the 2005 law violates state rights under the U.S. Constitution. "This congressional effort to control how states make law raises important questions about the Tenth Amendment's protections of state sovereignty," New York said.
The gun manufacturers, in a joint legal brief, said the federal appeals court correctly applied the 2005 statute and argued the law does not violate the Constitution. "This case does not qualify for Supreme Court review," the gun makers said.
The case is New York v. Beretta, 08-530.

The problem is, we got a leftist moonbat in the white house. If there is a vacancy in the supreme court, he will undoubtedly appoint some socialist to the supreme court. Fortunately, the justices who are most likely to retire in the near future (Stevens, Ginsberg) are also moonbats. So 0bama will only be replacing a moonbat with a moonbat.

However, Justice Scalia is 73 and so is the flip-flopper Kennedy. We have to be careful and not let 0bama get re-elected in 2012.

P.S. Republican presidents picked some people for the Supreme Court who they thought would be good jurists (Stevens, Souter) who turned out to be moonbats. Wouldn't it be nice if 0bama picked someone he thought was a fellow moonbat, but later turned out to be a decent judge? We can always hope.