Posts Tagged Supreme Court

Gun Banners Want Power

From The Federalist:

Why do Democrats despise the Second Amendment so much that they want to effectively banish a branch of the government over it? Because it strips them of their ability to control everything and accumulate power.

, , , , , ,

No Comments

Anti-Gun States Preparing To Pass More Gun Laws In Wake of Supreme Court Ruling

From Bearing Arms:

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

The Bruen Decision Was Just The Beginning

From The Truth About Guns:

There are no longer tiered levels of examination or scrutiny. If the law in question materially limits the right to keep and bear arms, then, with remarkably few exceptions, under Bruen the law will be an infringement on Second Amendment rights.

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

Will Supreme Court Take “Assault Weapon” Case?

From Cam and Company:

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

CDC Director Disputes Sotomayor’s Covid Claims

From NTD:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Rochelle Walenksy disputed Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s claim that 100,000 children are hospitalized or seriously ill with COVID-19 during arguments last week.

During an interview with “Fox News Sunday,” Walensky confirmed there are about 3,500 children in the hospital and who tested positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Restitution Should Be A Remedy For Unconstitutional Prosecutions

From The Truth About Guns:

An individual should not be punished for noncompliance with an unconstitutional law. If they were unjustly punished, then they deserve restitution. So far, only a few people have applied for restitution in DC. There is a larger class action lawsuit that needs to be filed against the district.

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Interview with Sharone Mitchell Jr. of the Cook County Public Defenders on NY Gun Case

From Slate’s What Next podcast:

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

The Effect Of Dread Scott On The New York Gun Case

From The Federalist:

Dred Scott has several implications for the Bruen case. First, it affirms that the Second Amendment right to bear arms is a normal individual right, like the other individual rights listed in the case, such as free exercise of religion, freedom of speech and of the press, jury trial, and so on.

Dred Scott refutes the notion that bans on bearing arms were the norm in the United States (or in any State). According to Dred Scott, American citizens have always had the right “to keep and carry arms wherever they went”—so recognizing blacks as citizens would mean recognizing their right to bear arms.

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

We The People Podcast Discusses SCOTUS NY Gun Case

From The National Constitution Center:

On this week’s episode, host Jeffrey Rosen is joined by two legal scholars who filed briefs on opposing sides of the case—Judge J. Michael Luttig who filed in support of Bruen, and David Kopel who filed in support of the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association. They detail the arguments they made in their briefs as well as what’s at stake in this case, and debate how to interpret the text, history, and meaning of the Second Amendment in light of whether the Court should uphold the New York law.

, , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

New York’s Gun Restrictions Are Modern Jim Crow

From Reason:

Next week the Supreme Court will consider a challenge to a New York law similar to the Alabama statute that empowered local officials like Butler to decide who could exercise the constitutional right to bear arms. The briefs urging the Court to overturn New York’s statute include several from African-American organizations that emphasize the long black tradition of armed self-defense, the racist roots of gun control laws, and their disproportionate impact on racial and ethnic minorities.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments