I suspect that Scalia & company didn't address licensing because
they could not find a way to rationalize it that was consistent with
their reading of history and the Constitution, yet were not willing
to concede as much liberty to the people as an honest treatment would
dictate. F---ing bastards. The more charitable interpretation is that
the majority sold out their beliefs in order to get swing vote
Anthony Kennedy on board.
Is it better to have this decision than a 5-4 ruling going the other
way that could have had created waves of political outrage exceeding
those generated by the Kelo v. New London case on eminent domain?
Maybe. But the ruling still reminds me of sausage -- understanding
what went into it would probably turn the stomach.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))