Where Can You Carry a Gun? Whiplash Court Rulings Create Confusion. [More]
Where can criminals carry guns?
Tag: Bruen
Igeocracy
Hawaii: House Judiciary Committee to Hear Anti-Gun Bills [More]
What do they care if they all run afoul of Bruen?
They have tax cows they can milk for legal war chest funds, all the while depleting their victims’ resources to fight back.
Worried Sickos
Latest Supreme Court-related ruling overturning gun regulations worries domestic violence survivor advocates [More]
Yeah, well their demands to throw due process out the window and eviscerate the rights of those inclined to obey disarmament edicts without due process is the more worrisome prospect.
[Via Jess]
I Could Have Told You That
There Goes the Boyfriend Loophole!
The question presented in this case is not whether prohibiting the
possession of firearms by someone subject to a domestic violence restraining order is a laudable policy goal. The question is whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), a specific statute that does so, is constitutional under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. In the light of N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n, Inc. v. Bruen, 142 S. Ct. 2111 (2022), it is not. [More]
If only there were a better way…
Kwame, How I Love Ya, How I Love Ya, My Dear Old Kwame
Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul appealed to the 5th District Appellate Court in Mount Vernon Monday to overturn a temporary restraining order against the Protect Illinois Communities Act, which bans dozens of handguns and rifles, .50-caliber guns, certain attachments and accessories, and limits cartridges to 10 rounds for long guns and 15 rounds for pistols. [More]
On the plus side, it’ll end up heading to the Bruen court…
[Via Jess]
Still Repressive After All These Years
Back in the day, Democrats reacted to the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education decision requiring that they respect all Americans’ civil liberties with fury and a petulant campaign of massive resistance. What is old is new again – the Democrat Party is back in form, furious that SCOTUS will not let them steal our rights. This time it is gun rights. The Bruen decision made it clear that blue states cannot deny your right to keep and bear arms on a whim. And the libs have gone into overdrive to undermine it. [More]
That the lying totalitarian wannabes call themselves “liberals” is all we need to know.
[Via Michael G]
Just When You Thought It Was Safe to Get Back in the Water
Supreme Court rejects New York gun retailers’ bid to block new concealed carry laws [More]
How the same court that ruled on Bruen could refuse to block this has Yul baffled.
I’m not sure it’s the “major blow” this is being presented as, and it could be there’s some 3D chess going on by Thomas and some others to allow lower court challenges to continue, but Lord knows I’ve been dead wrong in trying to figure out what it takes to acknowledge “shall not be infringed” before.
Maybe somebody’s got pictures?
Looping the Loopholers
Yes, They are Coming for Your Guns
In HB101, which was filed today by Representative Andrea Romero, if you own a semi-automatic rifle you would have to destroy it or surrender it to the state by July 1 of this year or you would be committing a felony. The bill also makes it a felony to own a magazine that holds more than 9 rounds. [More]
At some point, there have to be stiff sanctions for in-your-face defiance of the SCOTUS ruling or they’ll just keep pulling this sh!+.
The Enemies of My Enemies?
Federal public defenders in 9th Circuit challenge pretrial release ban on guns. Public defenders in 5th Circuit argue against ban on felons owning guns. [More]
And:
And now in the 3rd Circuit…
[Via Jess]
WWFD?
So… No Poll Taxes?
In a case involving fees for commercial filming in areas under the control of the National Park Service, the DC District Court has ruled that fees charged for exercising constitutional rights of the first order are unconstitutional… ‘This regime is difficult to square with the longstanding rule that the government may not “impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution,” including the First Amendment right to free expression.’ [More]
I see this was written before a historical understanding was ruled the standard.
Still, what’s with “a right granted by the federal constitution“?
[Via Dan Gifford]
A Sensitive Area
FEDERAL JUDGE GRANTS TRO IN SAF CHALLENGE OF NEW JERSEY GUN LAW [More]
I’m wondering at what point a judge is going to start sanctioning state defendants for clearly engaging in deliberate defiance and delays, and making it personal.
State Semiauto Bans Try to Accomplish What Feds Cannot (Yet)
Blue states are attempting to circumvent the U.S. Constitution and federal law to go after “assault weapons.” [More]
My latest piece…
But don’t worry. No one is trying to take your guns.
New York State of Mind
The State of New York is Still Fighting the Bruen Decision [More]
Herschel brings us up to date on Antonyuk v Satan’s Minions, including New York’s insulting brief and Stephen Stamboulieh’s authoritative response.
I have to find out what SCOTUS’s options are for slapping inferiors defying hierarchical precedent down.
Hatchet Job
‘No, No!’ Said the Queen. ‘Sentence First — Verdict Afterwards.’*
The Cuyahoga County case came after Delvonte Philpotts was indicted in 2017 on charges of rape, kidnapping and assault. Prosecutors later dropped those charges, but before they did, Cleveland police found pictures Philpotts posted to social media showing him standing outside his home with a pistol. Police got a search warrant, found the gun in Philpotts’ home, and arrested him for violating a state law banning people under indictment from having a firearm. [More]
“Four Republican judges,” eh?
From what I’ve been able to glean, and if there’s not more than one person with that rather unique name, Delvonte may not exactly be the poster child for unalienable rights. That said, if this can catch him up it can catch you and me up, and I want to know what my “pro-gun” state senator intends to do about it.
“Probable cause” for the search warrant also seems kind of hinky without knowing when the photo was taken and whether or not it was a replica firearm. And that said, leave self-incrimination on social media to the morons.
[Via JG]
Just Like the Founders Intended
A federal appeals court on Monday allowed New York to restrict the carrying of firearms on private property under a new law adopted in wake of a major U.S. Supreme Court ruling that expanded gun rights. [More]
Sack is a Clintonista and Wesley was appointed by Dubya, but Bianco was a Trump nominee.
We haven’t heard the last of this, but the first of it is ludicrous, offensive and intolerable.
[Via Jess]
