[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

That was a big decision to comment and take a stand on. Especially when only "3" weighed in and said the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to state's rights. They are setting a precedent for their view on the issue, IMO. To me, that is concrete. I take that as concrete.

She didn't just comment and make a stand she ruled on it, the case was before her she had to pick which way she would rule. The SC doesn't care what the Circuits say they rule how they see it. The Precedent of the 2nd Circuit in that case applies only to cases out of NY. Also the reverse of what was said in the article is that 3 of the 6 judges ruled it wasn't incorporated.