Gorsuch and Kavanaugh disagree on US vs Davis et al

[ArcadiaGP]

U.S. Supreme Court strikes down stiff firearms penalties

Neil Gorsuch Sides with Liberal Justices in 5-4 Decision, Brett Kavanaugh Dissents

Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch sided with the U.S. Supreme Court's four liberal members on Monday in striking down as unconstitutionally vague a law imposing stiff criminal sentences for people convicted of certain crimes involving firearms.

In the 5-4 ruling, with Gorsuch's fellow conservatives in dissent, the court ruled against President Donald Trump's administration in declaring that the federal law in question was written too vaguely and thus violated the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of due process. Trump's two appointees to the court, Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, disagreed in the decision.

The court invalidated the firearms convictions of two men prosecuted in Texas on a variety of charges for their roles in a series of 2014 gas station robberies in Texas. Although the robbers were armed, no shots were fired.

 

[historian]

"A vague law is no law at all"--Gorsuch.

Kavanaugh is more like Alito, Gorsuch like Scalia.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

This confuses me. We should be happy, right? Which seems odd, seeing as how the liberal members of the court endorsed it (and Gorsuch sided with them). Don't we always say that violence is violence, and "gun violence" is an unnecessary distinction?

 

[Ark]

This confuses me. We should be happy, right? Which seems odd, seeing as how the liberal members of the court endorsed it (and Gorsuch sided with them). Don't we always say that violence is violence, and "gun violence" is an unnecessary distinction?

I'm happy to see a high quality standard being applied to federal lawmaking. Agree with the specifics or not, laws need to be clearly written and specific.