Last Friday I posted my major thoughts on constitutional interpretation and Noel Canning, and I may not have that much more to say about it until I finish a couple of articles that discuss the decision later this summer. But in the meantime, I did come across two interesting posts responding to mine.
One is by Mike Ramsey, at the Originalism blog. Mike has a very different take on the decision than I do, but he still sees it “as a victory (of sorts) for originalism.”
The other is by Brandon Combs of the Firearms Policy Coalition. He suggests that my analysis of Noel Canning might have implications for the Second Amendment and magazine limits. I don’t know about that, but I thought it might be of interest to some readers.