>>>Reuters story here:
>>>http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSWBT00928420080626?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true
>>>
>>>Opinion here:
>>>http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/07-2901.pdf
>>
>>A good day for gun rights advocates. Based on the opinions of Justices Scalia and Stevens in today's ruling, there is still sharp disagreement about the ambiguous wording of the 2nd Amendment. The conservatives control the Court now and carried a 5-4 majority. (You didn't even need to check a scorecard to know who the 5 were and who the 4 were). This does give more support to the right of individuals to own guns -- existing law, the 1939 ruling, interpreted the 2nd Amendment within the context of a militia -- but I don't think we have heard the last of this issue.
>
>"The conservatives control the Court now"
>
>I must disagree with this statement based on a couple earlier rulings this session which went 5-4 the other way. It's rather clear to me that Kennedy controls this court from his swing position.
>
>As to this decision I have always thought this is a no-brainer and I'm surprised it took this long. Of course I have thought other decisions were no-brainers as well and have been sorely disappointed by this "conservative" court.

How much control do they need? Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, and Alito are reliable conservative votes on every decision. They start out needing just one more vote. Kennedy is in a sense still a swing voter but things have already shifted with the Roberts court. A number of decisions in his first term went 6-3 or 7-2, in contrast to the almost standard 5-4 decisions of the Rehnquist court.

Some say Bush is leaving no legacy. This is not true. Just look at the Supreme Court.