The decision rejected the U.S. Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Second Amendment.

The Hawaii Supreme Court handed down a unanimous opinion on Wednesday declaring that its state constitution grants individuals absolutely no right to keep and bear arms outside the context of military service. Its decision rejected the U.S. Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Second Amendment, refusing to interpolate SCOTUS’ shoddy historical analysis into Hawaii law. Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern discussed the ruling on this week’s Slate Plus segment of Amicus; their conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity.

    • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
      12·
      9 months ago

      So you can see why states are so defiant when the union tries to impose laws over them

      • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
        1·
        9 months ago

        Aren’t US states like counties? Like the states have a narrow set of rules they decide over and the rest comes from the top down.

        • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
          1·
          9 months ago

          Over the years the federal government has expanded it’s power, so ideally yes but States still have a lot of power

          The notion that they are self governing is why they scream about state’s rights and push against any loss of control

          • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
            1·
            9 months ago

            Hah, even I remember from history class that states rights just meant states right to do slavery in the US.

            I guess it is then closer to a state and county relationship for the US states and federal government. The EU probably is not very comparable as it mostly does trade stuff, collective bargaining and consumer protection. Joining and leaving is also free for anyone usually based on a referendum.