Notes from the Resistance
Obama Judge Says to Hell with the Supreme Court, Orders Trump DOJ to Turn Over Docs Related to Decision to Revoke ‘Protected Status’ for Hundreds of Thousands of Migrants [More]
Millions of Democrat cultists are fine with inferior courts imposing their subversion on the rest of the Republic, and they have enough representation to block a fix by Congress. At some point, Trump will need to exercise executive prerogative.
[Via Michael G]
What’s to negotiate?
The Supreme Court heard oral argument today in birthright citizen case with implications for 2A. [Watch]
I was hoping some prominent voice in the gun adovcacy community would finally address how immigration demographics threaten 2A, but no such luck. Instead, we get Sonia Sotomayor disingenuously playing devil’s advocate for nationwide injunctions by asking what would happen if a president ordered gun bans and confiscations.
The answer wouldn’t be a legal one.
It hasn’t been done because they wouldn’t dare.
[Via Jess]
Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall has joined a 26-state coalition urging the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) to intervene in a legal challenge to Hawaii’s firearms law, Act 52, which restricts the carrying or possession of firearms in various public and private locations deemed “sensitive,” such as parks, beaches, bars, and financial institutions. [More]
Good, but there are more pressing issues that affect ALL of us.
In the meantime, Hawaiians can just do what I did for @ 30 years in California…
[Via Jess]
Justice Jackson says attacks on judges, including impeachment calls, are ‘designed to intimidate’ [More]
Yeah, no $#!+.
Because if you can’t be, then you become unaccountable.
Why do you think that Second Amendment you keep voting against is still working well enough to discourage mass confiscations?
Anybody see anything on Snope or Ocean Tactical…? [More]
Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen led a 26-state coalition today asking the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) to intervene and halt Hawaii’s unconstitutional gun ban which prohibits the carry or possession of firearms in designated “sensitive” places, including bars and restaurants serving alcohol, parks and beaches, banks and financial institutions, and other areas. [More]
Why it’s even necessary speaks volumes of the mindset that votes to be ruled.
[Via Jess]
Stephen Stamboulieh brings us some good news about Pam Bondi and DOJ doing something necessary and good by filing a brief in support of the Second Amendment, noting Hawaii trying to ban guns on private property without specific owner permnission effectively equates to a gun ban practically everywhere. This is a hopeful sign and we need to see more like this.
The challenge is another example of great legal navigation and piloting by Alan Beck.
As an aside, this is how “guntubing” ought to be, a subject matter authority articuately sharing knowledge and guidance, as opposed to mansplaining the work of others for clicks.
And pay attention to this, @ 7:15 in:
The Ninth Circuit needs to be broken up as a court. It’s too big, it’s way too powerful, and it does some really stupid things that we’re going to talk about in my 7 o’clock live tonight where I just lost $400,000 in that case.
That’s something we’ve talked about before.
Supreme Court’s “Ghost Gun” Ruling Accidentally Paves Way For Next-Gen 80% Firearms [More]
Don’t go celebrating the workaround just yet.
Another lawsuit and another injunction and we’re back to Square One. And if “common use” is the new standard, I wouldn’t be looking at “uncommon tools” as a solution.
[Via bondmen]
SCOTUS’s Refusal To End Leftists’ Judicial Coup Is Damaging Its Credibility More Than The Media Ever Could [More]
You gotta wonder who’s got what on whom…
[Via bondmen]
Supreme Court won’t hear challenge to California ban on gun shows on public land [More]
They put about as much effort into it as most gun owners.
[Via Jess]
Alito’s right to warn: Court’s knee-jerk habit of slapping Trump will cost it dearly [More]
How? With “uncongenial” judicial appointments?
We’ve already established that tough confirmation questions are off limits. And don’t count the Democrats out for a comeback.
Wake me when there are real costs, and a means to exact them.
[Via Michael G]
SCOTUS ruling against Yost clears path for effort to abolish qualified immunity for police to advance [More]
“Law and order” Republicans need to figure out who we need that law and order for, and why.
Just goes to show: I’ve liked Yost, and Thomas and Alito, but we’ll never agree with everyone on everything.
[Via JG]
In a case that could potentially have far-reaching implications for similar lawsuits across the nation, the U.S. Supreme Court has denied Minnesota’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari in Jacobson v. Worth, the Second Amendment Foundation’s (SAF) challenge to the 18-20-year-old carry ban in the state…The high court’s refusal to hear the case means the Eighth Circuit’s ruling stands as a final judgment, confirming SAF’s win. [More]
Now, how do we change “could” to “will”?
We’re awaiting word on Snope/Ocean State tactical, and if SCOTUS is going to make a decisoin or once more kick the can down the road. Meanwhile, here are some sobering thoughts:
This is especially frustrating to watch after feeling like I’m the lone voice in the wilderness warning that relying solely on “self defense” while ignoring the militia aspect makes 2A more vulnerable to infringements, and how putting all faith in the “in common use at the time” argument can be a trap.
[Via Jess]
This ensures gun rights will continue to be denied [More]
There are plenty making excuses, but it doesn’t change the fact that they know what Founding intent was, and a right delayed is a right denied.
[T]he proximate-cause issue, in limbo will result in continuing legal uncertainty and ongoing attacks on the industry facilitated by courts that are allowing the most extreme theories of proximate cause in which remoteness is disregarded. [More]
The antis and their robed agents on the bench are counting on it.
Me, I’m still wondering which “State or Federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing of the product” is legitimately Constitutional.
[Via Michael G]