Notes from the Resistance
Is the object to wait for a better case to strip much of the unrestrained rulemaking power away from all federal agencies? [Watch]
Attorney Mark W. Smith speculates on what sounds like a plausible legal scenario and setup, and says don’t abandon all hope on bump stocks. I hope he’s right.
I’ve just heard too many 3D chess claims before.
[Via Jess]
Freeman said the insurance requirement was analogous to some 19th-century laws requiring gun owners to post bond in order to carry a gun. [More]
Ah yes, Licky Liccardo’s law…
The antis will try to use Bruen’s “historical understanding” to justify every disarmament edict they can think up. Let unsaid with that approach:
Were those edicts ever challenged on Second Amendment grounds? Because what they won’t find is the Supreme Court upholding such “laws.”
[Via Jess]
Petition GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U. S. ___ (2022). [More]
Supreme Court Tells Lower Court to Reconsider Massachusetts Misdemeanor Handgun Ban
It doesn’t make up for screwing us on bump stocks.
[Via Jess]
CERTIORARI DENIED
21-159 APOSHIAN, W. C. V. GARLAND, ATT’Y GEN., ET AL. [More]
All the Supreme Court has to do to let tyranny stand is…nothing.
I’m wondering if anyone will revisit this in light of Bruen, but then again, the court has pretty much told us they’re not going to touch it.
Some of us will keep fighting in other ways.
CNN, of course, can’t wait to let the cats out.
[Via Jess]
U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right [to] regulate online speech [More]
So… no more “wrong-thinking“…?
With a conflict between the 5th and 11th Circuits, we’ll have to see what SCOTUS does.
[Via Robert J]
A witty and informative email reply by attorney Donald Kilmer to a discussion on the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors banning .50-caliber handguns:
As long the ban doesn’t exceed the .64 caliber U.S. issued smoothbore flintlock boarding pistol, we have nothing to worry about. Maybe the Board of Sups should read a little history.
Take that to mean you can’t have a permitted gun with you in a private automobile, either. The entire city is being turned into a “patchwork quilt” designed to make it impossible to travel within its limits without violating the law. [More]
By ignoring the Supreme Court’s decision with impunity, this has effectively become not just a real insurrection, but a sanctioned secession.
My fantasy of forcing ATF to surrender my property back to me may not be so unrealistic provided SCOTUS doesn’t flake out…?
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors Tuesday directed its attorneys to draft a series of ordinances aimed at regulating gun sales and possession in the county, including a ban on the sale of .50-caliber handguns and ammunition in unincorporated areas. Another proposed ordinance would require “buffer zones” between gun/ammunition dealers and “sensitive areas” such as schools, day care centers and parks in unincorporated areas. Another would ban the possession of firearms on all county property. [More]
SCOTUS said “historical understanding,” not “hysterical understanding”…
[Via Jess]
New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen: Originalism and the Relevance of Common Law and Reconstruction-Era Restrictions on Exercise of a Right [More]
David T. Hardy’s new law review manuscript is online. He concludes the majority made some shaky assumptions, too.
I’ve got some reading to do. Looks like no “Dancing with the Stars” for me tonight…
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]
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]
Particularly after Heller and McDonald, as recently reaffirmed by Bruen, the government certainly cannot prevent Petitioner from exercising his Second Amendment right to keep firearms in the home. And the Second Circuit may not use Torvicia’s exercise of that constitutional right to render him vulnerable to government searches and seizures of his
firearms which violate Fourth Amendment protections but for some atextual, judge-invented special needs exception. [More]
“Single issue” apologists and flat-out deceivers take note.
[Via Jess]
Morton’s condemns abortion rights protesters for disrupting Kavanaugh’s freedom to ‘eat dinner’ [More]
And now the “progressives are doing what “progressives” do best: Lying and acting like malignant children out for revenge.
Then there are “student loan forgiveness activist Melissa Byme” and ShutDown DC…
I can’t help but wonder what the DOJ would do if “conservative” protestors went after Ketanji Brown Jackson this way, and I’m thinking hate crimes and seditious conspiracy would be “on the table.”
Meanwhile, Man of the People Menendez certainly doesn’t eat like his average constituent. Maybe if Edie Falco and PETA had known about that in advance they could have thrown a bucket of blood on him instead of sitting down for a cordial photo op…
[Via Mack H]
A thought strikes about the Supreme Court’s decision to send abortion back to the states, with leftists who are all about “home rule” on gun grabs howling in fury when it’s their ox getting gored.
Will the next step be a personhood lawsuit challenging a state’s denial of equal protection ostensibly guaranteed by “the supreme Law of the Land”? I’m recalling Ike sending federal troops in for rights enforcement against Faubus…
What’s not to celebrate? By all means, let’s do. Realistically. Let’s just not forget we’ve got a long way to go to “shall not be infringed” and it’s important to understand that some of the opinions from the majority will be more helpful toward getting there than others. [More]
Along with the admitted good come some exploitable (and unnecessary) concessions that Democrat states are already taking full advantage of, and that will take years to wrangle through.
Historical Record ~ 18-20 Years Olds Always Had Guns [More]
Now that we have the Bruen standard to apply…
If real principles – or lack thereof – are only shared behind closed doors with select politicians trying to advance an agenda, the whole purpose of public hearings is exposed as fraudulent theater, a dishonest performance with the sole intent to manipulate the voting public. [More]
It’s rare to hear a public figure admit the hearings are just predetermined performances for show and the real quid pro quo agreements happen out of earshot.
“We need to reform or do away with the whole thing, for the sake of the planet,” the “Squad” member added. AOC’s office did not immediately respond to The Post’s request for clarification about whether she was referring to the filibuster or the Supreme Court itself. [More]
Spoken lie a true wannabe dictatress.
If the Republican “leadership” doesn’t blow November, watch Democrats pull a 180 on filibusters.
[Via Jess]
Supreme Court hands Biden victory, allows end to ‘Remain in Mexico’ policy [More]
Good thing this has nothing to do with that “single issue” …
Thanks, Roberts and Kavanaugh! You just set things up to ultimately undo all the good done in Bruen and most gun owners will never make the connection because the “gun rights groups” refuse to acknowledge it.
“Ketanji Brown Jackson is sworn in as the first Black Supreme Court justice in U.S. history,” GMA tweeted at 1:46 p.m. [More]
And they can’t say “first black woman” because they’re not biologists.
“Congress did not grant EPA…the authority to devise emissions caps based on the generation shifting approach the Agency took in the Clean Power Plan,” the majority wrote, referring to an Obama-era power plant regulation. [More]
Agencies need Constitutionally-delegated authority and the executive branch can’t just usurp powers? Who knew?
And if anything ought to freeze Greta’s face into a permanent bitter scowl, this should do it…
[Via WiscoDave]
Tuesday, Sen. Anthony Portantino, a Democrat from Glendale, introduced legislation that he said would “update” the state’s concealed carry law to make it more restrictive, while also complying with the highest court’s latest dictate. [More]
Any doubts this will pass, and challenges and appeals will drag on for years?
UPDATE
And not to be outdone, New York decides to push things to the limit and beyond.
[Via Jess]
Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion noted “sensitive places“ like schools and government buildings could have gun bans. [More]
Jeez, and AOC and Charlie think he lied to them…
[Via Mack H]
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez calls for supreme court justices to be impeached – The congresswoman says Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch lied under oath to Congress about their views on Roe [More]
And:
Charlie Crist calls for impeaching Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh [More]
If anybody should be booted out, it’s these two oath-breaking totalitarian wannabes. Besides, I thought the protocol was they stuck to general terms and didn’t ask specific tough commitment questions in the job interview…?
“In recent decades a recurring Senate issue has been what kinds of questions are appropriate for Senators to pose to a Supreme Court nominee appearing at hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Particularly at issue has been whether, or to what extent, questions by committee members should seek out a nominee’s personal views on current legal or constitutional issues or on past Supreme Court decisions that have involved those issues. Usually, when Senators at confirmation hearings have asked Supreme Court nominees to comment on topical legal and constitutional issues, the nominees have firmly declined to do so. In those situations, the nominees typically have taken the position that answers to questions which convey their personal views would conflict with their obligation to avoid appearing to make commitments, or provide signals, as to how they would vote as a Justice on future cases.”
Which makes Susan Collins getting a private heads-up all the more objectionable.
[Via Jess]
Ninth Circuit Panel Sends California “Assault Weapons” Ban Challenge Back to District Court, so the District Court can reconsider it in light of the Supreme Court’s new Bruen precedent. [More]
I don’t see where “self-defense” alone will cut it without a strong core purpose argument.
I do see this:
The firearms that the law in question prohibits are, in virtually every state of the Union, exactly the sorts of lawful weapons in common use that law abiding people possess at home for lawful purposes; and exactly what they would bring to service in militia duty should such cause be necessary.
Here’s the case history thus far.
If this goes to SCOTUS, and it probably will, we’ll see if any briefs expand on that, and then if the high court will hear it.
Although the majority’s ruling impacts our century-old justifiable need requirement for carrying firearms, it does not change any other aspect of New Jersey’s public carry law. To be clear: Carrying a handgun without a permit is still illegal in this state, and all other requirements for obtaining a carry permit still apply. [More]
And like our totalitarian counterparts in California, we will continue to throw every obstacle that will take years to clear that we can think of in the way.
It’s called being a Faubus.
