Via The Washington Post, the AP is reporting that the Supreme Court has struck down Washington DC's three decade-old handgun ban.

Details are still rolling in and will be posted here or at my blog as I get them. They're reporting a 5-4 decision (shocker!), and I'm guessing Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy.

Update 1: Just in, the decision was written by Justice Antonin "Fuck You" Scalia. Apparently the Second Amendment trumps everything else. No surprise there.

Update 2: I win! Roberts, Alito, Kennedy, and Thomas joined Scalia on the opinion. But that was too easy.

Update 3: Transcript (PDF) or oral arguments from the case. (via DKos' AdamB)

Update 4: The opinion (PDF) is now available. From SCOTUSblog:

In District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290), the Court nullified two provisions of the city of Washington’s strict 1976 gun control law: a flat ban on possessing a gun in one’s home, and a requirement that any gun — except one kept at a business — must be unloaded and disassembled or have a trigger lock in place. The Court said it was not passing on a part of the law requiring that guns be licensed. It said that issuing a license to a handgun owner, so the weapon can be used at home, would be a sufficient remedy for the Second Amendment violation of denying any access to a handgun. While the declaration of the individual right was clear-cut, as was the decision’s nullification of key parts of the Washington, D.C., law, the Court did not lay down a standard for judging the constitutionality of any other federal laws — an omission that the dissenters attacked strongly. Even so, the opinion made it clear that, whatever ultimate test emerge, it probably would be a tough one to meet, at least when self-defense is at issue. As Justice Scalia put it, whatever remains for “future evaluation” about the strength of the right, “it surely elevates above all other interests the right of law-abiding responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home.”

Update 5: Justice Kennedy's reasoning behind voting to strike down the gun ban: BEARS!

But who knew that a case testing the scope of the Second Amendment's "right to bear arms" would smoke out a secret side of Justice Anthony Kennedy? A side so intensely protective of his right to self-defense that he makes—as I count—four separate references to some mythical "remote settler" who—at the time of the framing of the Constitution—would have needed a gun to "defend himself and his family against hostile Indian tribes and outlaws, wolves and bears, and grizzlies."

It looks like May 31st is going to be anything but an ordinary Saturday in the park for Washington residents, as Hillary supporters from across the nation convene in the nations capital to speak out in support of counting every vote.

A group of High Profile Clinton Supporters are planning a day long rally in front of the hotel where the Rules and Bylaws committee will be considering the fate of the Michigan and Florida primaries.

It will draw together some of Clinton's most loyal backers and be emceed by Jehmu Greene, the former president of Rock the Vote who sat on the DNC committee that spent 2005 trying to reform the party's primary process.

Announced speakers so far include National Organization for Women President Kim Gandy and Florida Democratic congresswoman Corinne Brown. Organizers say that they expect individuals to come in from 26 different states for the rally, as well as some major celebrity speakers, and that they are receiving logistical assistance or other support from the pro-Clinton United Federation of Teachers and EMILY's List. The group Florida Demands Representation, organized by James Hannagan, will also be there.

Washington Protest Planned

HILLARY'S SWING STATE ADVANTAGE
PRINCETON, NJ -- In the 20 states where Hillary Clinton has claimed victory in the 2008 Democratic primary and caucus elections (winning the popular vote), she has led John McCain in Gallup Poll Daily trial heats for the general election over the past two weeks of Gallup Poll Daily tracking by 50% to 43%. In those same states, Barack Obama is about tied with McCain among national registered voters, 45% to 46%.

In contrast, in the 28 states and the District of Columbia where Obama has won a higher share of the popular vote against Clinton in the 2008 Democratic primaries and caucuses, there is essentially no difference in how Obama and Clinton each fare against McCain. Both Democrats are statistically tied with him for the fall election.

All of this speaks to Sen. Clinton's claim that her primary-state victories over Obama indicate her potential superiority in the general election.

PUERTO RICANS HEAD TO THE POLLS SUNDAY

POLLS SHOW CLINTON WITH A SOLID LEAD

There are about 2.5 million registered voters in Puerto Rico. Normally, 80 percent of them vote. While it may be less than that this weekend, still, close to one million people could show up to choose between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. That's about the same number that turned out in states like Missouri and New Jersey.

Over 1 Million To Cast Votes

In most inclusive count, Clinton has the numbers

Lost in the excitement of Barack Obama's coronation this week was an inconvenient fact of Tuesday's results: Hillary Clinton netted approximately 150,000 votes and is now poised to finish the primary season as the popular-vote leader. In some quaint circles, presumably, these things still matter. Real Clear Politics keeps track of six versions of the popular-vote total. They are, in ascending order of inclusivity: (1) the popular vote of sanctioned contests; (2) the total of sanctioned contests, plus estimated votes from the Iowa, Nevada, Maine and Washington caucuses; (3) the popular vote plus Florida; (4) popular vote plus Florida and the caucuses; (5) the popular vote plus Florida and Michigan; (6) popular vote plus Florida, Michigan, and the caucus estimates. After Tuesday, Clinton now leads in two of these six counts.

If you believe that the most important precept in democratic politics is to "count every vote," then the sixth category is the most inclusive, and here Clinton leads Obama by 71,301 votes. Of course, this includes the Michigan result, where Sen. Obama had removed his name from the ballot. So while it may be the most inclusive, it may not be the most fair.

The third and fourth counts - the ones which include Florida - seem more fair. Here, Obama is clinging to a slight lead of 146,786 votes (257,008, with the caucus estimates). However, with Puerto Rico, Montana, and South Dakota remaining, he will almost certainly finish behind her in these counts, likely by a few hundred thousand votes.

But could Clinton take over the lead in all of the popular-vote tabulations? Quite possibly. In Puerto Rico's last major election, two million people voted. Let's assume that turnout for this historic vote - Puerto Rico has never had a presidential primary before - will be equal to or greater than that turnout.

If Clinton were to win Puerto Rico by 20 points she would pick up at least a 400,000-vote margin. This would allow her to swamp Obama in the popular-vote counts, which include Florida, making her the leader in four of the six permutations of the popular vote. At that point, Obama would be left clinging to the least-inclusive count, which he now leads by 441,558 votes (551,780, including caucuses).

To understand how razor-thin this majority is, consider that if the Puerto Rico turnout is slightly larger than we have imagined - or Clinton's margin is slightly greater - then Clinton would finish the primary process leading in every conceivable vote count. With two million voters, a 28 percent victory would put Clinton over the top even in the count, which excludes Florida and Michigan and includes estimates for Obama's caucus victories.

It is this looming prospect which explains the tremendous pressure Obama partisans and the media are putting on Clinton to drop out of the race. They want her gone now because they understand that she has an excellent chance of finishing as the undisputed people's choice.

Would it matter if Clinton were the undisputed (or even disputed) popular-vote winner? That's hard to say. The question is, matter to whom? The superdelegates will determine the nominee and there's no telling what will sway them. They have no objective criteria from which to make their decisions. But if they were to deny the popular-vote champ the nomination, there is a real question of whether Democratic voters would reconcile themselves to the decision. As it is, much of the talk about Democratic defections in November has been overstated.<> Partisan voters almost always come home after their candidate loses. The problem arises when a candidate's supporters believe that their guy (or gal) didn't lose. Expect the chorus calling for Clinton's withdrawal to grow louder over the next week, with people insisting that she has no "path to victory."

Clinton's path is both obvious and simple: Win the popular vote and force Barack Obama and his cheerleaders to explain why that doesn't matter.

It is amazing how often this primary season has prompted me to haul out a spyglass to peer back into my life. A lot of the memories are soft focus now, a little more so with each passing year; but the time period from the early 60's to the end of the 70's is when I was young. And I hold the recollections of this time to be dear, shared only with intimates. I have never written about them although I am a fierce critic of those who do.

The tale of the 60's and 70's  has never been told to my satisfaction probably because I keep seeking my story, and it is never there.  I was more political than a flower child. Free love and drugs were ok, if that was your thing, and I smoked grass, especially when I went dancing; but to me this aspect of the era was more incidental than substantial. Love-ins, flower power, bell bottoms and tambourines were the trappings. The meat of  the era was Political and no song summed it up better than "Something Happening Here" by  Buffalo Springfield:  

There's something happening here
What it is ain't exactly clear
There's a man with a gun over there
Telling me I got to beware

I think it's time we stop, children, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down

There's battle lines being drawn
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
Young people speaking their minds
Getting so much resistance from behind

I think it's time we stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down

What a field-day for the heat
A thousand people in the street
Singing songs and carrying signs
Mostly say, hooray for our side

It's time we stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down

Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid
You step out of line, the man come and take you away

We better stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Stop, now, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Stop, children, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down

The song captures an entire gestalt, the mindset of a generation not only committed to ending a war of intervention, but also determined to make the world into a better, safer, more humane place. One fit for children and animals, which was a slogan one often saw on posters.  But we were not self conscious about it. People rarely wrote things down.  No one imagined how this time in our lives would become almost mythological. We all believed the way it was is the way it would always be. I didn't write much either. In those days I was just a face in the crowd. I listened, clapped, carried signs, and cheered others. This was fine with me. I didn't aspire to more of a role. The working class part of me remained a little withheld. It took a lot for me to break the law; so many others were way ahead of me.  And yet it seems to me now, that I was there, at so many of the Big Moments.

Throughout this election season, I have been writing a series visiting the various primary/caucus states via thoughts on travel and highways.    This week we visit The Chesapeake Bay and Washington, DC, some of which is excerpted below.

Previous entries visited Iowa, Detroit (Michigan), Nevada, Florida, and various locales along Interstate 80 for Super Tuesday".

John Edwards:

This isn't about petty politics or good intentions.

Corporate greed and influence in Washington are stealing our children's future.

The moral test of our generation is whether we're going to allow this broken system to go on without a fight or take on corporate greed and stand up for the middle class and American jobs before it's too late.

They aren't going to just give their power away.

Saving the middle class is going to be an epic battle, and that's a fight I was born for.

John Edwards: the Fight

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90kiOdnkw 3Y
----

So Who's Fighting who, and for What?

John Edwards frames a powerful new argument to the describe our Broken System of Government, which we put up with in Washington DC.

If you haven't seen it yet, it well worth a listen:

Part 1:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=B6_RBXw6NSw

Part 2:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=vB4CVHTzzvw

Part 3:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NpxMHcqqxgg

Great Imaginary, fiery rhetoric!
But what exactly is "this Wall around Washington" that Edwards says we must tear down?

Explore with me, a few ways in which the "Rhetoric Meets Reality", after the fold, in a simple photo-essay:

On April 14th, Step It Up 2007 organized events all over the country to call attention to the problem of global warming and demand an 80% reduction in carbon emissions by 2050. The variety of events was great and with the rallies across the country combined, it was the largest global warming demonstration in the history of this country. Even presidential candidate John Edwards, who has a strong plan for energy and stopping global warming spoke at one of the rallies in Florida.

In Washington, DC, participants made a giant human postcard in front of the Capitol Building. We spelled out "80% by 2050," the goal for carbon reduction, in people. Photographers took aerial photos with the help of a crane. People cheered. People sang. People got silly. It was a great day.

Although John Edwards is becoming known as the candidate for specific plans, or as New York Daily News calls "The Man with a Plan":

Edwards is aiming for something higher and grander, and asking us to do the same. Exactly what a man running for President ought to do.

his campaign is also about action - action now. As you can see:

Edwards in Pennsylvania: National Enegy Day of Action

This diary is about John Edward's volunteer service orgnization One Corps and also gives an update on some coming events in the DC/ Virginia area that show the variety of the things One Corps is involved in. And then I'll throw in some links and news at the bottom.

See below for more