Tag: Supreme Court

One Step Forward…

The Second Amendment Foundation has been granted summary judgement in a federal challenge of California’s One-Gun-A-Month (OGM) purchase law. U.S. District Judge William Q. Hayes stayed his decision for 30 days for the defendants to facilitate an appeal. [More]

And thumbing noses at Bruen will drag on and on and on with the hopes that Republicans blow the election and Democrats can reshape SCOTUS to reverse it.

And here’s the thing:

The Supreme Court has no power to enforce its decisions. It cannot call out the troops or compel Congress or the president to obey. The Court relies on the executive and legislative branches to carry out its rulings. In some cases, the Supreme Court has been unable to enforce its rulings.

I’d need a lawyer to weigh in on whether they could charge inferior court judges with contempt for disregarding their rulings, and they’d still be dependent on the other branches. I fear the only “legal” remedy is impeachment, for which Republicans have neither the power nor the appetite.

So now we have to see what Hayes says in a month, and then see who initiates an appeal, then lather, rinse, repeat.

Delay of Game

Maryland’s “assault weapon” ban has been kicked back up by the panel for en banc review by the anti-gun Fourth Circuit, meaning it’s going to take the Supreme Court to sort this one out — and all they have to do to leave this gross denial of rights in place is nothing. [Watch]

[Via Jess]

Sore Loser

I am disappointed in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision stripping states of the authority to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment for federal candidates. Colorado should be able to bar oath-breaking insurrections from our ballot. [More]

What you ought to be is embarrassed that even your own side proves you to be a childish and incompetent partisan hack tampering with adult things you don’t understand.

But then, we already knew that.

SCOTUS: Trump Stays on Ballot

The Supreme Court on Monday tossed out a Colorado court ruling that barred Donald Trump from appearing on the state’s Republican presidential primary ballot. The ruling means that no other state can bar Trump, or any other candidate, from a presidential ballot by invoking the insurrection clause in the Constitution. [More]

Plea to Pres. Trump: As all the treasonous lawfare has shown, these people will stop at nothing. Now that this door has been slammed shut, some are no doubt plotting more extreme measures of exclusion. Double your security and most of all, LISTEN TO THEM.

Supreme Court Back-and-Forth on Bump Stocks Creates Nail-Biter Anticipation

This pretty much defined the day. Those expecting a Second Amendment defense decrying Chevron deference overreach instead heard the justices trying to grasp competing definitions of “function of a trigger” along with scenarios unlikely to persuade judges who equate “common use” with widespread commercial popularity. [More]

You were expecting a slam dunk…?

It Depends Upon What the Meaning of the Word ‘Peers’ Is

Justice Alito worries about improperly removing jurors with ‘traditional religious beliefs’ [More]

And if you think that’s a disqualifier, try going through voir dire on a gun case and admitting you’re an NRA member…

[Via Michael G]

The Holding Pattern

I’ve mentioned before how I love to read books but between the reading I have to do for my professional obligations, the work itself, and my personal life, there’s just not a lot of time. I suppose having a sense of purpose and looking forward every morning to a full day I’m enthusiastic about living is something I should be grateful for, but it does mean making one choice means not making another — for now.

I just finished The Deadly Path, and am finalizing an interview with former ATF Agent and author Pete Forcelli for AmmoLand. Stay tuned.

I also agreed to read The Misinformation Antidote because the author contacted Firearms News claiming “court decisions carry with them the seeds of the [Second] amendment’s future destruction.” I’ll let you know what I think after I read it.

And then yesterday, one of my favorite liberty authors, Miguel A. Faria, Jr., M.D., sent me a copy of his new book, Stalin, Mao, Communism, and their 21st-Century Aftermath in Russia and China. The man knows whereof he speaks and I’m looking forward to reading it and sharing my impressions — just give me a minute.

A Right Delayed

Washington Gun Law President, William Kirk, discuses the three pieces of huge news where three separate petitions to the United States Supreme Court have been filed asking for review of Illinois’ assault weapon and magazine bans. This, added to the other petition filed last week in the matter of Bianchi v. Brown, means that there is now four separate peititions before SCOTUS to settle this once and for all. [Watch]

You can’t put it off any longer, SCOTUS.

Make your decision.

Some of us have already made ours.

[Via Jess]

Back for Another Round

The Second Amendment Foundation and Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms have once again petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to grant certiorari in their continuing challenge of Maryland’s ban on so-called “assault weapons.” [More]

How much longer can they avoid the inevitable?

More Than a Ghost of a Chance

US Department of Justice filed main brief in US Supreme Court today asking the Court to hear the Vanderstock v. Garland case dealing with the constitutionality of the Biden “ghost gun” frame and receiver rules. [More]

Mark W. Smith thinks there’s a good chance they’ll hear it.

[Via Jess]

Allies Through Action

Washington Gun Law President, William Kirk, discusses all the Amicus Briefs filed in Cargill v. Garland, a challenge to ATF’s bump stock ban. This case involves a lot more than just bump stocks, rather it is a challenge to ATF’s entire playbook. Now is the time for the Amicus to fly in and today we noticed a new player in the game, Palmetto State Armory. They, along with the Firearms Regulatory and Accountability Coalition have filed an outstanding brief in support of Garland, but this marks the first time since we had this channel that a major firearms manufacturer has thrown in on something like this. So today we give them an “Atta-Boy” so that you can arm yourself with education. [Watch]

Support those who support us.

[Via Jess]

Crazy Like a Fox

Crazy news out of California. the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: A three- judge panel has decided that they are going to literally, literally do nothing, do nothing for likely over a year when it comes to the case of Miller vs. Bonta… [Watch]

The robed traitors are waiting for the fix to come in on the elections so Democrats can reshape SCOTUS and reverse Bruen…

[Via Jess]

Florida Post Office Gun Ruling and SCOTUS Votes Should Have Big Impact on Montana Senate Race

Tester demands they be disarmed when they go to the post office not even allowed to keep their lawfully owned guns securely stored in their vehicles … If it were up to Tester, we would not have the Bruen decision… [More]

Republican contenders Johnson and Sheehy can use both of these issues against him.

High Definition

Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson spells out the legal chaos that will arise when the right-wing Roberts Court overturns the 1984 Chevron doctrine, which for 40 years has allowed federal agencies to make reasonable interpretations of undefined terms in federal statutes. [More]

Says the apparatchik who can’t define “woman”…

One Man’s ‘Peril’…

Members of the Supreme Court’s conservative majority seemed inclined on Wednesday to overturn or limit a key precedent that has empowered executive agencies and frustrated business groups hostile to government regulation. Judging from questions in two hard-fought arguments that lasted a total of more than three and a half hours, the fate of a foundational doctrine of administrative law called Chevron deference appeared to be in peril. [More]

This fish story is the one to watch…

Any bets on how soon I get my bump stock back…?

Gunkies in Need of a Fix

In defining what constitutes a public health emergency, the governor asserts that both gun violence and drug abuse “comfortably fall within” the category because of extremely dangerous conditions posed by weapons and toxic chemical agents posing an imminent threat to many New Mexico residents. The temporary orders don’t violate constitutional rights, she said. [More]

That’s because she’s an unqualified liar with a subversive agenda.

I’d think if Democrats are going to treat “gun dependency” like they do addiction, they’d have dispensaries where you could pick up free ones so you wouldn’t have to share…

[Via Jess]

The One to Watch

Bloomberg Law’s take on the Court’s consideration of the case is, unsurprisingly, driven by the fact that it might upend some of the charges leveled at Trump. And it is hard to criticize that focus because, well…Trump. He is the big dog, and if Fischer wins his appeal some of the cases against Trump either get complicated or even go away. [More]

Which helps explain some of the Marxist desperation…

Let’s just hope we’re not talking Kraken here…

[Via Michael G]

From the ‘Our Democracy’ People

Colorado Supreme Court removes Trump from 2024 ballot [More]

These monsters think they can deny millions, most of whom are armed. And anyone who thinks this is about Trump is deliberately missing the point.

I’m breaking my own “easy on the cussing and for the most part avoid it” rule: These motherfucking treasonous Democrat apparatchiks really are bent on starting a civil war. Any president elected under these restrictions will not be legitimate and any orders will be unlawful and morally resistable against enforcers.

You’d better fix this, SCOTUS.

Sounds Like a Plan

And semiautos/magazines…?

They’ll Know It When They See It?

“We recognize that ‘good moral character’ is a spongy concept susceptible to abuse.” [More]

Like the definition of “pornography“? Or “woman“?

I wonder if a Second Amendment advocate who believes it is a bulwark against domestic tyranny could be disqualified…

And if that would be sufficient to bring a libel suit…

We’re the Only Ones Bending Knees Enough

Supreme Court sides with woman forced to her knees by police when she was 83 [More]

Looks like they don’t get qualified immunity for this one, but what I’m not clear on is does the department pay or the officers themselves, or all? And will she still be alive to collect by the time this settles?

[Via Michael G]

Verified by MonsterInsights