Kagan on guns: Court precedents are 'settled law'

Lawyer Blogs

Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan says she considers recent high court decisions expanding gun rights to be "settled law."

Kagan was asked at her confirmation hearing about two recent decisions, including a 5-4 ruling Monday, which essentially guaranteed citizens' Second Amendment rights to have guns, no matter where they live.

Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California decried growing gang violence in her state, saying officials need leeway to deal with it.

Kagan responded that "once a court decides a case as it did, it's binding precedent." And she said judges must respect a precedent unless it proves unworkable or new facts emerge that would change the circumstances of a case.

Related listings

  • US top court extends gun rights to states, cities

    US top court extends gun rights to states, cities

    Lawyer Blogs 06/28/2010

    The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday extended gun rights to every state and city in the nation in a ruling involving Chicago's 28-year-old handgun ban.By a 5-4 vote and splitting along conservative and liberal lines, the nation's highest court extended i...

  • Kilpatrick lawyer: He'll battle this indictment

    Kilpatrick lawyer: He'll battle this indictment

    Lawyer Blogs 06/25/2010

    A lawyer for Kwame Kilpatrick said Thursday that the ex-Detroit mayor would fight Wednesday's indictment."Mr. Kilpatrick will vigorously defend these allegations," Farmington Hills attorney Arnold Reed said at a news conference. He said an indictment...

  • High court sides with ex-Enron CEO Skilling

    High court sides with ex-Enron CEO Skilling

    Lawyer Blogs 06/24/2010

    The Supreme Court has sided with former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling in limiting the use of a federal fraud law that has been a favorite of white-collar crime prosecutors.The court said Thursday that the "honest services" law could not be used in convi...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

St Peters, MO Professional License Attorney Attorney John Lynch has been the go-to choice for many professionals facing administrative sanction. >> read