Category: courts

Your Masters Have Spoken

Appeals Court: No First Amendment Right to Religious Exemption From Vaccine Mandate [More]

You must let us experiment on your children or we will take them from you, and if you resist us, we will kill you.

More souls for Moloch, just like the Founders intended.

One of the judges is a Trump appointee, once more underscoring the importance of vetting these bastards before handing them a gavel.

[Via Michael G]

The Rest of the Story

Why Would People Who Ignore the Second Amendment Pay Attention to the Sixth?

California Supreme Court: No Right to In-Person Cross-Examination of Accuser During Campus Sexual Assault Proceedings [More]

Well, yeah, we’re supposed to #BelieveWomen.

Noting some “women” are more equal than others.

[Via Michael G]

The Butterfly Effect

9th Circuit overturns Hawaii butterfly knife ban, citing Supreme Court ‘history’ standard on guns [More]

Here ’tis…

More fine work from Alan Beck and Stephen Stamboulieh…

I notice Adam Winkler whining about Bruen creating an “impossible position.” Why they ever invited this guy to GRPC is beyond me– it’s not like he’s a pal.

Can you imagine if we started challenging other tyrannical edicts and programs based on historical understanding at the time of ratification? It could change everything.

Who will Judge the Judge?

Bowe Bergdahl’s conviction vacated by federal judge [More]

The disclosure issue is BS. Every judge out there has partisan preferences, as does every federal employee, including (and especially) Reggie Walton. I guess traitor’s gotta stick together.

He’s the same robed subversive (and Bush appointee, by the way) who understood full well that individuals were dying in D.C. but nonetheless declared the Second Amendment to be a “collective right.”

As We Forgive Those Only Concerned About Themselves?

In 2020, a paralyzed Walker said he’d forgiven the shooter. He told a judge on the stand that his life expectancy has been shortened 20 – 30 years from the shooting and that defendant Thomlison won’t even serve that much time in prison. [More]

It doesn’t sound like the stupid old bastard who shot him wants to be forgiven. It sounds like he just wants his sentence reduced.

[Via bondmen]

Mooting Cases Can Chill Incentives to Pursue Gun Denials

Who wants to spend years and substantial effort to force a correction and not even be able to recover costs? Who has those kinds of resources? [More]

Here’s another huge advantage that rights deniers with unlimited state resources have over gun owners of limited means.

Who will Judge the Judges?

A federal appeals court has restored most of New Jersey’s new gun control laws limiting firearms in sensitive public places after overturning a lower court ruling blocking many restrictions while a legal challenge plays out. [More]

Here’s the order. If someone gets killed as a result of it, I wonder how much sleep the judges will lose.

Krause was appointed by Obama and Chung was appointed by Biden. The one that concerns me here is Porter, appointed by Trump.

[Via Jess]

Who Will Judge the Judges?

Third Circuit, En Banc, Range v. Lombardo: Not All Modern Felons Lose Second Amendment Rights … Several judges dissented. [More]

Which ones?

Who nominated them?

Who voted to confirm them?

I could go find out but it would take time I don’t have right now.

It would be nice if there were a website that provided judicial ratings and a way to hold those who enabled them politically accountable. It would be even more useful if it also politically scaled and rated inferior court judges running in “nonpartisan” elections and showed who backs them so their partisan allegiances could be inferred.

I guess I’m talking something like Ballotpedia on steroids. Too bad the name “Judicial Watch” is taken, although come to think of it, they’d be the perfect ones to take this on.

How Do You Get From Here to There?

“We have already recognized in Heller at least one way in which the Second Amendment’s historically fixed meaning applies to new circumstances. Its reference to arms does not apply only to those arms in existence in the 18th Century… just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, the Second Amendment extends prima facie to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding. Thus even though the Second Amendment’s definition of arms is fixed according to the historical understanding that that general definition covers modern…modern instruments that facilitate armed self-defense. [Watch]

Exactly right. What I’m having trouble connecting the dots on is this:

What is that burden that the government has to bear? The government has to come forth to prove that the arms that they want to ban are not in common use.

Ignoring the first 13 words and focusing exclusively on self-defense leaves the door open to saying post-’86 machine guns are not in common use. It also means that new technological developments that the government reserves for itself will never be.

That is what I’d like to see Mr. Smith elaborate on. I believe he’s one of the few who could.

As an aside, I think the first Republican presidential candidate who promised to nominate him if any Supreme Court openings happen would gain a huge advantage with gun owners.

[Via Stephen I]

Time for a Change

Yesterday, the state presented an “expert” witness who hilariously claimed that it takes 5 seconds or more to change a magazine. This false and absurd statement was made in an effort to convince the court that low capacity magazines will protect people in mass shootings by giving them time to run away. [More]

A moron presenting himself as an expert testifying that an abomination bent on slaughter would nonetheless obey magazine restrictions did not result in his being laughed out of the courtroom? Who is this guy?

One for the Gipper

A federal judge on Tuesday rejected a request to block a new Washington state law banning the sale of certain semi-automatic rifles…[More]

Thanks, Ronald Reagan!

Your legacy lives on.

[Via Jess]

Related UPDATE

The dolt actually said they “allow a shooter to fire as fast as they can pull the trigger, unlike previous guns.”

[Via WiscoDave]

An Age-Old Question

Attorneys representing the Second Amendment Foundation and its partners in a federal lawsuit challenging the prohibition of handgun sales to young adults have filed a reply to the federal government’s arguments supporting the ban. The case is known as Reese v. ATF. [More]

What must the grabbers think of those they think old enough to vote Democrat?

Verified by MonsterInsights