Tag: Supreme Court

Breaking Some Eggs

Justice Alito Wrecks ATF’s ‘Ghost Gun’ Argument: Are Eggs and Peppers an Omelet?[More]

So are John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett bent on scrambling things?

Mark W. Smith has some interesting thoughts, including “if the ATF theory is allowed here, then drilling a single hole in AR-15s to convert it into a machine gun means that an AR-15 is “readily convertable” into a machine gun and thus a machine gun. SCOTUS will need to issue a ruling to avoid this result.”

Mexican Standoff

Supreme Court Will Hear Gun Industry Challenge to Mexico’s Lawsuit – “Simply put, Mexico’s suit threatens to undermine American sovereignty and constitutional liberty, and it has no business in this country’s courts.” [More]

I expect our side to win. What I’m most curious of is what the Democrat judges will do, and how they will rationalize their arguments if they side with Mexico.

Between SCOTUS now taking on both this and frames/receivers, how any gun owner can justify not voting and letting Kamala Harris reshape the Court is beyond me.

[Via Michael G]

Private Parts

Throughout the document, Smith argues that the actions Trump took to overturn the election were in his private capacity – as a candidate – rather than in his official capacity, as a president. [More]

Speaking of acting in a private capacity, how is that not what election interference apparatchik Smith is doing, and why can’t (haven’t) Republicans and SCOTUS put an immediate halt to it?

Is This the One?

The Supreme Court is back in session as of Monday October 7th and they have a case before them in Snope v. Brown that could end all bans nationwide. This comes from a 4th circuit decision upholding the Maryland ban. [Watch]

There’s a huge difference between “could” and “will.”

Cross your fingers and wish for the best, but don’t invest all your hope.

[Via Jess]

Just Like the Framers Intended

For places that are newer, Defendants must point to regulations that are analogous to the regulations cited by the Supreme Court, taking into account that it is illogical to expect a government to regulate a place before it existed in its modern form. [More]

So, any building, parcel, street, city, territory, or state developed after ratification…?

What other articles in the Bill of Rights does this apply to?

Rapping SAPA

BOMBSHELL Interview: AG Of MO Joins The Channel & VOWS To Take SAPA To SCOTUS IMMEDIATELY! In today’s episode, we have a very special guest, the Attorney General of Missouri Andrew Bailey. He’s going to SCOTUS and no one is going to stop him [Watch]

Did they agree to take the case?

Since 2A is supposed to ultimately be about freedom, I can’t quite make the guy out to be a hero until I see some credible answers on keeping innocent prisoners incarcerated.

[Via Jess]

Pathway to Tyranny

The future of the Supreme Court is on the line in November’s elections. If Vice President Kamala Harris and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer are victorious in November, the independent Supreme Court that the Framers bequeathed to us will be a thing of the past. That’s one of the big reasons why Harris must be defeated in her campaign for president, and why Schumer must be demoted to Minority Leader. [More]

I forgot to mention: The Guardians beat Pittsburgh!

[Via bondmen]

The Games People Play

The Court should not grant certiorari to review at this stage but should permit the ordinary percolation process to continue and reserve its intervention for the point at which, if it comes at all, the courts of appeals are actually divided.” [More]

I understand what they’re doing and why.

It’s not them, it’s a fraudulent power-usurping system that allowed the first infringement to take place and has done nothing since but entrench and assail.

BATFE Slapping

Today, attorneys for Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) filed a merits-stage Respondents’ brief with the United States Supreme Court in FPC’s Garland v. VanDerStok lawsuit challenging ATF’s “Definition of ‘Frame or Receiver’ and Identification of Firearms” Rule. FPC’s brief, available at FPCLaw.org, explains why the government’s Rule cannot survive scrutiny and must fail. [More]

Here it is…

Mark W. Smith of The Four Boxes Diner breaks it down for us.

[Via Jess]

Race to the Top

A challenge against Maryland’s gun ban is likely to make it to the U.S. Supreme Court before gun ban challenges from other states. [More]

Sadly, all the high court has to do to let it stand is nothing.

If they do hear it, it will be a game-changer, but it will still leave the more fundamentally destructive NFA and Hughes Amendment in play.

Then there are the questions of when will they hear such a case, and who will be in power and appointing justices?

[Via Jess]

Thomas Wants to Address What ‘Arms’ are Protected by Second Amendment

The question before the courts should be simple: How did people at the time of the Constitution’s ratification define “arms”? [More]

“Weapons of war” are precisely what the Founders had in mind.

A Foolish Consistency

The Supreme Court refused to hear any Second Amendment cases as of now. So, why did they do this and what is the future of 2A Supreme Court litigations. Mark Smith Four Boxes Diner explains. [Watch]

Paint it how you like, but when policies and procedures override the reasons articulated in the Preamble for having them, something’s broken. You know it’s “shall not be infringed,” they know it’s “shall not be infringed,” and the traitors know it’s “shall not be infringed.”

We weren’t made to be ruled by hobgoblins, robed or otherwise.

[Via Jess]

Verified by MonsterInsights