Category: Legal

The Astroturfers are Sweating, But Not Over Finances

The aftermath of Bruen has also prompted a surge in lawsuits challenging various gun laws, according to Giffords, a gun control group, with more than 450 decisions trying to interpret the case. [More]

What a stacked deck. Because it’s not Giffords, which rakes in millions, that’s defending against infringment challenges. It’s various levels of government, with virtually unlimited tax plunder-funded legal war chests.

Meanwhile, the gun groups fighting on our behalf are begging for minimal contributions from already overextended members and supporters. Just don’t let the apparent success momentum of these efforts capitalizing on Bruen suggest it’s OK to ease up.

I may just write up a more detailed elaboration on this.

[Via Jess]

Slap Down

The Fifth Circuit panel ruled that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ Final Rule is illegal. Circuit Judge Kurt D. Englehardt wrote, “An agency cannot label conduct lawful one day and felonious the next—yet that is exactly what ATF accomplishes through its Final Rule. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED to the extent it holds unlawful the two challenged portions of the Final Rule, and VACATED and REMANDED as to the remedy.” The case is known as VanDerStok v. Garland. [More]

A Justice Department that was true to the Constitution would be enforcing rights and punishing government transgressors.

What a novel idea that would be.

Hunter Biden’s Lawyers are Playing to Supportive Media with ‘Vindictive Prosecution’ Insinuations

“Lawyers for Hunter Biden raised the prospect that he is the victim of ‘vindictive’ prosecution… [More]

And leave it to the “real reporters” to make that what the public takes away from all this.

Defcon 1?

Elon Musk Plans “Thermonuclear” Lawsuit Against Media Matters [More]

His lips to God’s ear.

I just did a quick check on Google and didn’t see where he’d filed it yet. I hope this doesn’t turn out to be another Zuckerberg cage match because I’d really like to see him kick their @$$es.

To paraphrase Yoda, “Fight or fight not. There is no challenge.”

Otherwise, you look ridiculous.

[Via Michael G]

International Tribunal Lawsuit an Unconstitutional Attempt to Subvert Second Amendment

The same goes for the OAS and its Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, both of which have no authority, legal, moral, or otherwise, to impose their diktats and override “the supreme Law of the Land.” [More]

Our sympathy does not give sufferers leave to lay claim to our rights. And defund the OAS.

Point of Origin

Illinois Assault Weapons Ban Faces New Challenge… The petition argues that Justices Elizabeth Rochford and Mary Kay O’Brien participated in the case despite receiving campaign contributions from those who support the ban. [More]

Now I want you to remember who did the original work that made this possible:

[T]he research and publicity this article has caused has led to a petition with the US Supreme Court on Caperton V Massey grounds, which was first brought up in this piece.

Take it from someone who knows what it’s like to be “bigfooted” out of a story by the media and latecomers.

I’ll probably put something together over the weekend to give this wider exposure. In the meantime, if you see any YouTube gun influencers who don’t give credit to Mom-At-Arms, notify viewers in their video comments.

Where Credit is Due

The Supreme Court Should Not Let Bureaucrats Invent Crimes by Rewriting the Law – The Trump administration’s unilateral ban on bump stocks turned owners of those rifle accessories into felons. [More]

Let’s not forget the role Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox played in paving the way (and good luck finding their joint statement on the NRA website anymore).

Pointing all that out and more seems to make some people uncomfortable. One angry reader canceled his subscription over it.

You know the type.

[Via Michael G]

No Fool Like an Old Fool

Federal judge upholds Colorado’s waiting period for firearm purchases [More]

So this Carter holdover dismissed Clayton Cramer’s fact-based analysis as “ad hominem” and went with the career prohibitionist, and said we need rights delayed because there might be drunks and it took time to manufacture guns back then…? What about if the gun was ready for sale?

Here’s the opinion.

What a subversive old fool.

[Via Jess]

That Should Have Been the End of It

Watkins… testified that she … never heard any commands for her and other Oath Keepers to enter the building on Jan. 6, 2021… Rhodes … told jurors that there was never a plan to attack the Capitol. He testified that he was surprised and upset when he learned that some group members had joined a pro-Trump mob in storming the building… [More]

I rest my case.

Unauthorized Means Unlawful

The US Department of Justice made a major concession involving whether licensing officials working for executive agencies may exercise “discretion” over CCW permits. [Watch]

That is big.

And using that rationale, I’d argue they can’t exercise executive “discretion” in “rulemaking” not backed by legislation, either.

Or in creating new classifications of “prohibited persons.”

[Via Jess]

Verified by MonsterInsights