Posts Tagged Supreme Court

Justice Roberts Is No Friend To Gun Owners

From Bearing Arms:

Gun owners have had a pretty good idea that Chief Justice John Roberts is reluctant to take a Second Amendment case for awhile now. First there was the Supreme Court’s mooting of a case dealing with a New York City gun law back in April, denying an opportunity for SCOTUS to once again weigh in on the right to keep and bear arms. That was followed in June by the refusal to hear any of the ten cases dealing with the Second Amendment that the Court had been considering in conference.

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

No Equal Justice For Gun Owners

From The Truth About Guns:

The Court has made clear that it is not the least bit interested in being the founding document’s guardian. It’s not even interested in resolving differing interpretations of the Constitution with major splits among the Circuit Courts when it comes to the right to keep and bear arms.

Instead of doing the hard work that it is tasked to do, the Court has decided to play in a popularity contest. While the Court grants only a small percentage of writs of certiorari (approximately 3%), Second Amendment challenges cry out for clarification and easily meet the criteria for the Court’s review.

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

Silence For 12 Years After Heller

From Reason:

Give it time, we were told. Wait a few years and the Court would eventually clarify the doctrine. The Second Amendment is now normal constitutional law, we were assured. And so time lapsed. 2011. 2012. 2013. 2014. Nothing.
Finally, in 2015, Justices Thomas and Scalia wrote two dissents from denial of cert. They called out their colleagues out for abdicating the Second Amendment. In December 2015, I wrote in National Review, “The lower courts continue to whittle away the Supreme Court’s rulings in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago, while seven justices stand by quietly, refusing to intervene.”

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Justices Don’t Trust Chief Justice With Second Amendment

From The Federalist:

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to pass on nearly a dozen gun-rights-related cases is breathtaking, not in the denial of hearing any, but in the seeming admission that the conservative associate justices think Chief Justice John Roberts can’t be trusted to protect the Bill of Rights.

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Supreme Court Denies All Pending 2A Cases

From The Truth About Guns:

Well, it has happened. Rather than the hoped-for clarification of the Second Amendment and the resolution of numerous Circuit Court splits, this morning the Supreme Court denied cert on all ten outstanding petitions in Second Amendment cases.

, , , , , ,

No Comments

Supreme Court Dissapoints

From Cam and Company:

, , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Washington Post Says SCOTUS Shouldn’t Take Any More Second Amendment Cases, Everything’s OK

From The Truth About Guns:

Since Heller,there has been virtually no disagreement among lower courts about how to apply these principles. Appeals courts have established a working consensus on how to evaluate gun measures, carefully following the Supreme Court’s guidance. When there is no disagreement among circuit courts, the Supreme Court typically declines to step in.

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Elites Hate That Normal People Have Guns

From The Washington Post:

Thus do right-wing extremists exploit America’s lax gun laws for political gain. Of course, the open carrying of rifles or handguns is a recipe for intimidation and potentially deadly confusion, even when not politically motivated. If shots ring out on a street full of armed pedestrians, how are the police supposed to identify the culprit?

On the whole, though, no state worthy of the name can permit exceptions to its monopoly on legitimate deployment of armed force like those in Michigan or North Carolina. Surely no sensible interpretation of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms would say a state must tolerate them.

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

No Comments

Heller Case Created A Dangerous Precedent

From The Federalist:

Cases challenging state bans on semi-automatic firearms have been appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States, and Democrats working toward civilian disarmament hope to prevail in part by characterizing semi-automatics as “dangerous and unusual” even when they are kept and borne in a peaceful manner, and even though they are owned by millions of Americans.

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

No Comments

SCOTUS Creates Dangerous Precedent By Declaring NY Gun Case Moot

From Bearing Arms:

The 6-3 ruling saw Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh siding with the liberal wing of the court, while Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch dissented from the opinion, arguing that the decision “permits our docket to be manipulated in a way that should not be countenanced.”

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

GOA Files Red Flag Against Sen. Schumer

From Gun Owners of America:

Saul Alinsky may have written his Rules for Radicals to give leftists an advantage in the battle for America’s soul, but that doesn’t mean that the rules aren’t tactically wise.  On Friday, Gun Owners of America (GOA) decided to put into play several of those rules when it asked [if] Sen. Chuck Schumer [would be] “red-flagged” as a potentially dangerous person.

, , , , ,

No Comments

Supreme Court Urged To Review Red Flag Ruling

From California Gun Rights Foundation:

WASHINGTON, D.C. (February 21, 2020) — Today, attorneys for California Gun Rights Foundation, Second Amendment Foundation, and a California resident filed a petition at the U.S. Supreme Court seeking review of an improperly decided Ninth Circuit ruling. The recent case filings in Rodriguez v. San Jose can be viewed at www.cagunrights.org/work.

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Opinion: New York Gun Case Is Silly

From The New York Times:

I don’t know how the Second Amendment case the Supreme Court heard this week will turn out, but I do know this: If the subject weren’t so serious, the case in its current posture, with substantial doubt about whether there is even a dispute left for the court to decide, would be downright funny. For a window into the dynamics of today’s Supreme Court, look no further than the transcript of the argument in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. City of New York.

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Anti-gunners Don’t Know What They’re Protesting

From Townhall:

It’s almost as though they were bussed in for the event, given signs and told to stand there and look angry. The National Rifle Association’s social media team asked anti-gunners the name of the case and what the case was about and none of them seemed to know. Shocker, right?

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

Gun Prohibition At Supreme Court

From Reason:

At issue in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. City of New York is a New York City law that banned licensed handgun owners from possessing, carrying, or transporting their weapons outside of their homes, with one exception: The law let licensed owners transport their handguns, unloaded and locked in a container, to and from an authorized gun range within city limits.

, , , , , ,

No Comments