How fitting

It would take some incredible gumption to cite Dred Scott v. Sanford in a positive way. But it appears that one of our nation's conservative jurists has found a way to do just that...

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit cited that memo in reversing a lower court that upheld the gun ban enacted by Washington‘s city council. But writing for a 2-1 majority, Judge Laurence Silberman, among the nation’s most influential judicial conservatives, acknowledged that “there is no unequivocal precedent that dictates the outcome of this case.” So he looked for guidance — and found it in Dred Scott.

In that case, the court found that the federal government lacked the authority to abolish a slaveowner’s property right in his slaves merely by outlawing slavery in new territories. No one contends “that Congress can make any law in a Territory respecting the establishment of religion, or the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press… [n]or can Congress deny to the people the right to keep and bear arms, nor the right to trial by jury,” Chief Justice Roger Taney, writing for a 7-2 court, explained in the section Silberman cited.

“Although Dred Scott is as infamous as it was erroneous in holding that African-Americans are not citizens, this passage expresses the view, albeit in passing, that the Second Amendment contains a personal right,” Silberman observes, before moving on to other precedents.

Ugh...

This is the depths to which only the Ernest T. Bass, ESQ could aspire as he flexes in front of his fun-house mirror in his "Celebrate Diversity" T-shirt and pretends he's Dirty Harry.

This is the way they view the Second Amendment:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

And the only place Silberman and others can find that view expressed is through a ruling saying African-Americans can't be citizens.