Constitutional Law

LA Times shows its understanding and impartiality

Here's its report on the oral argument in the Hayes case. All the Court is trying to do is figure out what Congress meant when it defined domestic violence offense. Does that mean the elements of the underlying misdemeanor must be (1) use or threat of force (2) against a household member, or just (1) misdemeanor use or threat of force? (I.e., the household member can be proven in the federal prosecution).

Headline:

Domestic violence abusers could get gun rights

The Supreme Court will decide whether people convicted of misdemeanor assault against their spouses or partners should have their 2nd Amendment rights restored because of a flaw in federal law.

First para: " Thousands convicted of a misdemeanor for threatening or assaulting a spouse or girlfriend could once again own guns because of a flaw in the federal law."

Story goes on to quote extensively from the government attorney's argument, and not a word from the other side. And no analysis of what the legal issue was.

Hat tip to Ambiguous Ambigue

Full post as published by Of Arms and the Law on November 11, 2008 (boomark / email).