Tag: Supreme Court

On a Sauer Note

[T]he Supreme Court has just denied cert in a case where the solicitor general of the United States under Donald Trump actually wanted the court to take it. This is huge great news folks because it is signaling that the Supreme Court is done with criminals defending the right to keep and bear arms and much more likely to let law-abiding ordinary citizens vindicate their rights. This is a big deal, folks, because as you know, those 18 USC 922G cases are problematic because their bad facts make bad law. [Watch]

I’m more concerned with the fact that the SG knows that and proceeded anyway. After all, didn’t NSSF tell us, “USA Today and gun control groups [were] in a tizzy [because] U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer wrote, ‘The United States has a substantial interest in the preservation of the right to keep and bear arms and in the proper interpretation of the Second Amendment…'”?

And Smith himself declares “Prosecutorial discretion has always been a part of our legal system.”

So why does this seem to be a tradition with “pro-gun”Republican administrations?

Never forget:

We condemn any program that involves enforcing unconstitutional “laws”, even if such “laws” are enforced only against violent criminals. Unconstitutional “laws” are illegal, harmful to public safety, tyrannical, and are inevitably enforced against ordinary, non-criminal citizens.

[Via Jess]

SCOTUS Refusal to Address School Ban on Gun Imagery Puts Freedom 250 Art Contestants at Risk

School 2A Rights SCOTS AI CHAT GPT

Teachers have been known to report students over perceived off-campus gun concerns before, even when no cause for them existed. [More]

Submitting a historically accurate entry could run afoul of “zero tolerance” intolerance.

Color within the Lines

The U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way on Tuesday for Alabama to use a pro-Republican congressional map that eliminates one of its two districts where Black voters make up a majority or ​near-majority, giving a boost to President Donald Trump as his party defends its control of Congress in November’s midterm elections. [More]

OK, but what’s that got to do with RKBA?

[Via Jess]

Thumbing Noses with Impunity

Alabama went to SCOTUS after the ruling in the Louisiana case, in which SCOTUS reminded everyone that you cannot use race as a factor in drawing a congressional district… Did the court listen? Nope… [More]

Just like the way they Democrats and their judges ignore Bruen.

That’s what you can get away with when there are no personal consequences.

[Via Michael G]

A Good First Step

Top DOJ official predicts Supreme Court will declare AR-15 rifles legal everywhere in America [More]

Great, as it should be.

I don’t mean to be the party pooper, but heeding Mr. Wolf (NSFW) for a second, two concerns remain:

  • What’s going to happen when Democrat states and Democrat judges ignore it?
  • What’s going to happen when Democrats take the majority?

Assuming we can get it to stick, how does the administration sound on ending NFA and GCA mg registration and the post-’86 ban? ?

Yeah, I know, there I go blackpilling again. Just ignore me and have some rainbow stew.

A Dose of Reality

[T]he last thing we want, the last thing we in the Second Amendment community want, as I see it, is for the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, or for any circuit for that matter, to come out right now, now at least, and say that machine guns are protected under the Second Amendment… We do not want that next case going to the Supreme Court involving machine guns. [More]

We will never get an unequivocal “shall not be infringed” unless and until there is a credible “or else” attached to the demand.

[Via Jess]

The Big Day is Finally Here!

The Second Amendment’s Big Day at the Supreme Court [Watch]

We’re told to be on the lookout for Duncan v. Bonta, Gators Custom Guns v. Washington, Viramontes v. Cook County, NAGR v. Lamont, Grant v. Higgins, Gardner v. Maryland, Peterson v. United States, and Hunter v. S.F.

I see none granted cert and the rest ignored ot denied. Double-check me in case I missed something.

I’m gonna start calling SCOTUS the Ruala.

[Via Jess]

Supreme Court ‘Conservatives’ Throw Gun Owners Under the Bus, Again

On April 6, the Supreme Court demonstrated once again that the “landmark” Bruen decision isn’t worth the paper it’s written on, and neither are the paper tigers that President Trump appointed to the bench in his previous administration. [More]

The list just keeps growing.

As noted before:

Think of one job you’ve ever applied for where you’d have gotten it if you decided to play coy with the hiring managers. While it may be “inappropriate” for a judge to weigh in on a specific case before confirmation, there’s no reason why general principles of understanding should be off-limits.

This is My Shocked Face

New York City’s Prohibition on Stun Guns, Tasers Survives Appeal [More]

And here we thought the Supreme Court was pretty clear whan it ruled:

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.

Until such @$$hole judges face consequences, this kind of crap will continue.

Assuming you don’t want to pay Bloomberg Law to read their spin, Four Boxes Diner breaks things down for us.

[Via Jess]

You Pays Your Money and You Takes Your Chances

SCOTUS Lets Illinois Public Transit Carry Ban Stand, Leaving a Dangerous “Sensitive Places” Theory in Place [More]

Hey, none of them have to take the bus.

Remember the good old days before Democrats f_d it all up?

Defense against highwaymen in Colonial America and the early American frontier involved a combination of armed passengers, specialized weaponry, and defensive tactics, as stagecoaches were frequently targeted for mail, cash, and passenger valuables… A common weapon for guarding coaches was the blunderbuss, a short-barreled shotgun-like firearm ideal for close-quarters combat.

Silent Running

Attorneys for George Peterson have filed a petition for certiorari with the United States Supreme Court in Peterson v. United States, a Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC)-backed challenge to the federal government’s unconstitutional National Firearms Act (NFA) tax and registration requirements for suppressors. [More]

Now all SCOTUS has to do to let bad law stand is…nothing.

[Via Jess]