Did anyone listen to the Heller arguments being heard before the Supreme Court yesterday?
I thought that Justice Robert’s comments about a the current standards of review were interesting because they suggested a waxing discomfort of the court to continue to pigeon hole every Bill of Rights question into one of three standards of review. A sui generis leap away from the traditional standards would be an enormous swing toward the strict constructionist standpoint and could potentially jeopordize the legitimacy, or at least the potency of current Constitutional interpretations based entirely upon the present application of the three primary standards of review (i.e. Roe v. Wade, Johnson v. Texas etc.). I think that Justice Roberts’ remarks were a clear shot across the bow of future arguments relying entirely upon the compelling interest/reasonableness standards that currently govern the court’s decisions.
