The
U.S. Supreme Court decisions yesterday had three implications of note.
1. The extension of the 14th Amendment to include laws that states make regarding gun possession is a long time in coming. This related to my points in many blogs that the Civil War will not be over until we celebrate the 150th or 200th anniversary of the Emancipation Declaration.
The 14th Amendment was
passed shortly after the Emancipation Declaration went into effect in
1864 and clearly extends the Bill of Rights to cover all state laws.
But the Supreme Court has ignored that application to the 2nd Amendment
for 55 years after it was first applied to school integration in Brown
v. Board of Education. Now it applies to all the Bill of Rights. The
core idea of the 2nd Amendment is very clear, in English, and is finally the law of
the land.
Hopefully the right to self defense, which is what the 2nd Amendment is about, will sometime be applied all over the world to Jews (and Israel). It should start with the tens of millions of Jew-hating Europeans and the current American president.
2. The Court takes up the question of 'patents on business processes'. The Court effectively eliminates business process patents unless they apply to the use of a machine or similar object.
This is an incidental matter. The Court has not and can not fix the patent laws which need to be fixed by Congress.
1. The extension of the 14th Amendment to include laws that states make regarding gun possession is a long time in coming. This related to my points in many blogs that the Civil War will not be over until we celebrate the 150th or 200th anniversary of the Emancipation Declaration.
Hopefully the right to self defense, which is what the 2nd Amendment is about, will sometime be applied all over the world to Jews (and Israel). It should start with the tens of millions of Jew-hating Europeans and the current American president.
2. The Court takes up the question of 'patents on business processes'. The Court effectively eliminates business process patents unless they apply to the use of a machine or similar object.
This is an incidental matter. The Court has not and can not fix the patent laws which need to be fixed by Congress.
3. The Court ruled on an element of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act that nearly every big business claims is onerous.
This Court decision has no effect on the Act, it merely diddles with a technical issue of Presidential power in the control of an accounting board that administers 'Sarbox' as it is not affectionately called by accountants.