Category: courts

A Means to an End

A Minnesota Federal District judge defies the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision by applying “means-end scrutiny” and “narrow tailoring” to a case involving banning firearms at the Minnesota State Fair. [More]

He knows he can get away with it, hence giving SCOTUS and all gun owners the finger. If the Repubs don’t blow the “red wave,” they’ll have enough of a majority in the House to impeach, but not the 2/3 needed in the Senate to convict.

Naturally, the “progressive” Brennan Center says “if the impeach­ment power is used to punish judges for their rulings, it under­mines the vital inde­pend­ence of our judi­cial branch.”

Well, Clinton appointee Tunheim already did that by ignoring the High Court’s precedent and deferring to political interests. And, as with all things leftist, it depends on who’s doing the impeaching.

[Via Jess]

Who will Judge the Judges?

Stop Houston Murders, a political action committee formed in Houston, Texas, to take on “soft-on-crime Democrat judges,” seeks to call attention to the skyrocketing violent crime and murder rate in the city and the judges who facilitate a criminal catch-and-release program. [More]

There needs to be a one-stop website rating the political inclinations of all judges who run for office.  Ballotpedia is about as close as I’ve found, but I’m talking one with issues ratings and who backs them, etc.

Anybody know of one?

[Via bondmen]

A Historical Understanding

The State of Minnesota also filed its own motion for summary judgment, which …  went on to say … that “18-20 year old women are also not covered by the plain text of the Second Amendment.” [More]

I once wrote a speculative article (way pre-Heller) I can’t find now that basically made the case that the only women mentioned in U.S. Code are “female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.” My intent was to set up a staged lawsuit with a (friendly) FFL refusing to sell a gun to a (friendly) woman and having it overturned on equal protection grounds.

I wonder if the statute now needs to be amended to add the words “self-identified”…

[Via Jess]

As Long as We’re Talking AstroTurf…

The most high-profile effort has come from Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, who has emerged as one of the most prominent critics of what he describes as the corrupting influence of dark money on the court. He has proposed a bill that would treat amicus filers more like lobbyists, subjecting them to registration and financial reporting. [More]

While Sheldon gets to influence as a perk.

That’s pretty rich, considering the indignation is being stirred up by a Bloomberg Machine beneficiary. You know, the same machine that has for years been quietly setting up infrastructure in the states (that means with the media keeping mum) to make legal challenges to infringements necessary…

[Via Remarks]

Open Season

“The gun rights movement has been given a weapon of mass destruction, and it will annihilate approximately 75% of the gun laws eventually,” said Evan Nappen, a New Jersey gun rights attorney. [More]

What do the antis call that? Oh, yeah, a good first step.

[Via bondmen]

Related UPDATE

The Supreme Court’s Bruen Gun Decision Is Even Bigger Than You Think [More]

The tip of the iceberg…

[Via Michael G]

You’ll Eat It and You’ll Like It

More Changes to State Policies and New Court Developments After the Bruen Case [More]

MA and CA, not to mention Bloomberg Central, ought to have some wailing and teeth gnashing going on. And this means Bonta is going back to Benitez.

Sometimes The Trace can be useful, even though it’s no secret what they’re rooting for.

Their Precious Hindquarters

Highland Park Shooter Pleads Not Guilty to More Than 100 Charges, Walking Back Previous Admission [More]

Curious, how their instinct is to defend themselves. It’s almost like you could use that against them during their attack — if you were only “allowed” to…

[Via Robert J]

And just when I thought I couldn’t have any less respect for the parents:

Mr Greenberg fought back against critics via Twitter on Wednesday morning, arguing that the parents are being scapegoated by the “system” when the focus should instead be on easy access to military-grade assault weapons.

Yeah, make it about disarming the rest of us. @$$holes.

‘Ready Succeptibility’

“Whether or not the Rifle used in the Attack was, in fact, modified to fire in a fully automatic fashion, its ready susceptibility to such modification rendered it a ‘machinegun’ as sold, prohibiting its sale to the general public,” the complaint alleges. [More]

That’s why some of us were so adamant against the doors the Trump “bump stock” ban would open. And why I have no patience with point-missing bloviators and their “stupid piece of plastic isn’t a hill worth dying on” ignorance…

[Via Jess]

A Criminal Mayor Conspiracy

GUN CONTROL MAYORS CONSPIRING AGAINST FIREARM MANUFACTURERS [More]

The Bloomberg criminals are picking up the “public nuisance” lawsuit strategy.

So when are industry reps Larry Keane and the NSSF going to do more than yack about it and call for their members to pick a target city like New York and go all Barrett on them?

[Via Jess]

My Kind of Precedent

Yesterday, a judge in California threw out charges for carrying a handgun without a license, saying that “the defendant cannot be punished for exercising his right to public carry” while the state’s unconstitutional may-issue law was in effect. [More]

Hey, they say what starts in California spreads out to the rest of the country…

If Wishes Were Fishes

Celebrity YouTuber cites Supreme Court gun ruling in bid to dismiss machine gun charges [More]

I’m not seeing how the most effective arguments can be considered with zero mentions of “militia.” That makes me wonder about the Second Amendment law track record the attorneys have achieved.

Don’t get me wrong: I think “shall not be infringed” and “every terrible implement of the soldier” should be all you need to win, but I wouldn’t take that into court unless I had a lot more behind it.

I’d like to see some qualified voices weigh in on the viability of the motion and the risks of establishing any precedents that could complicate future efforts if it fails.

[Via Antigone]

A Superior Observation

[T]he Court is unaware of historical precedent that would permit a governmental entity to entirely ban a type of weapon that is commonly used by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, whether in an individual’s home or in public. The Court also notes that the Town’s justifications are somewhat undermined by the other subsections of this very provision. Specifically, subsection (b)(1) provides that “[a]ny person holding a valid federal firearms license from possession of any firearm authorized pursuant to such license” will not be subject to the prohibition of 10-9-40. The following subsection, (b)(2) likewise exempts any “firearm for which the U.S. Government has issued a stamp or permit pursuant to the National Firearms Act.” The National Firearms Act, referenced in the latter subsection, provides for permitting such firearms as short-barreled shotguns and rifles, machineguns, and silencers. Each of those weapons is arguably even more deadly than the semi-automatic weapons that the Town of Superior seeks to ban, yet these provisions would permit individuals to possess, sell, or otherwise transfer them. [More]

Let’s see if any of the NAGR critics are willing to grudgingly admit they’re doing good here.

[Via Antigone]

A Team Effort

On Monday, Gun Owners of America (GOA) and the Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) filed a motion for a preliminary injunction against the Biden Administration’s “Ghost Gun” and Gun Registry Final Rule, which will go into effect on August 24. Today, GOA and GOF were joined by the Attorneys General of 17 states in the filing: Arizona, West Virginia, Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming.

I’d give you a link but at this writing, it has not yet been posted on the Press Center page. I’ll update when I have it and as I have time.

We’re the Only Ones Mistried Enough

The jury then sent a second note after 10 a.m. that “we have decided as a group that we cannot reach an unanimous decision or verdict.” [More]

Unless the guy was coerced, insane, under the influence, or sleepwalking, “willful” appears to be self-evident.

I’d be curious to know if more than one juror was the holdout, and if not, about party affiliation.

[Via Michael G]

The Wrong Question

Is our justice system still capable of deterring killers? [More]

It never was.

What deters us from killing has always come from within. What deters killers is the same thing that deters all predators.

Is our justice system still capable of dealing with killers?

Increasingly the system results in anything but justice, and no, it’s up to the individual to have the means, the judgment, the training, the will, and the presence of mind afterward to not do or say anything to trigger the ever-dangerous state to turn on him.

[Via Mack H]

A Historical Understanding

So, when gun-control advocates claim that mass shootings represent a special case that the Founders never knew about or could have predicted, they’re wrong. Right now, they’re using the nation’s anger and fear over mass shootings to push for a raft of new gun-rights restrictions. But those laws will probably violate the Constitution, for reasons the Supreme Court has made crystal clear. [More]

It’s interesting how those who want to erase the Founders from the collective memory are always presuming to tell us what they understood.

[Via bondmen]

♫ No One Hires Like Gascón ♫

Gascón Bringing in Country’s Highest-Paid Attorney to Fight His Prosecutors – Gascón’s prosecutors are mad that he won’t let them do their jobs. Courts agree with the prosecutors, but Gascón is taking it to the California Supreme Court. [More]

♫ He’s especially good at prevaricating… ♫

(And for those of you who don’t know where this recurring theme comes from…)

[Via Michael G]

A Commonsense Tyrant Safety Law

Notwithstanding any other law, any person, including an entity, attorney, or law firm, who seeks declaratory or injunctive relief to prevent this state, a political subdivision, a governmental entity or public official in this state, or a person in this state from enforcing any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, or any other type of law that regulates or restricts firearms, or that represents any litigant seeking that relief, is jointly and severally liable to pay the attorney’s fees and costs of the prevailing party…. Any person, including an entity, attorney, or law firm, who seeks declaratory or injunctive relief as described in subdivision (a), shall not be deemed a prevailing party under this section or any other provision of this chapter. [More]

Constitutional attorney Mark W. Smith explains how this will financially intimidate challengers of California citizen disarmament edicts.

[Via Jess]

Protection Racket

Weeks after she was denied a protection order, a Michigan woman and her family are dead – A judge denied the order June 27, saying there was insufficient evidence of immediate or irreparable injury. The woman and her family were found dead Sunday, officials said. [More]

The prohibitionists will say this proves the need for “red flag laws.”

Who thinks a piece of paper would have stopped this maniac or prevented him from getting his hands on whatever he wanted for a butchery spree?

Look what they (purposely) didn’t tell us when they report he “bought a gun.”

The only way to prevent such atrocities, proven once more, is to separate the threat from the victim pool. With full due process.

That may not be foolproof? Anybody see any guarantees in life? And a system could be set up that would do that and do a much better job of considering individual circumstances and probabilities than one-size-fits-all prior restraints.

The alternative is denying rights to the innocent. We call governments that do that “tyrannical” for a reason. We’re supposed to accept that because of statistically rare aberrations lawmakers refuse to more effectively address, mostly for political reasons?

[Via Steve T]

So On Top of Everything Else, ‘Progressives’ are Deadbeats?

Ohio college racks up millions in interest on cash owed to bakery over false racism allegations – The school and a former dean were found guilty of libeling the bakery as racist [More]

I’ve been following this because false accusations of being haters are made all the time against cultural traditionalists and gun owners, I’ve covered  Oberlin’s anti-gun shenanigans in the past, I’ve posted plenty about the town’s “progressive” nonsense over the years, I admire the bakery owners’ courage to not resort to woke cowardice in the face of ginned-up media hostility, and I used to pass through there all the time on the way to my buddy’s airfield (since relocated).

Verified by MonsterInsights