This Ping List is for all things pertaining to infringes upon or victories for the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
This Ping List is for all things pertaining to infringes upon or victories for the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
The court can do no such thing by themselves.
..may expand?! How about RESTORE?
Cant see the article as it is behind a paywall. and I am not going to allow ads.
So. Can we get a summary, please?
For later
bump for later- although i don ‘t think we need an expansion, the original 2n’d A if upheld is all we really need- would be better if the SC announced all gun laws unconstitutional- or at least most of them
Expand???!!?!?
How can they expand beyond “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”?...
Unless they are going to start issuing them to anyone that wants them.
In this case, SCOTUS likely recognizes that NYC repealed the law in question just to derail the case against it after years of advancing litigation - with reasonably presumable intention of re-instating said law once looming threat of SCOTUS review ends. Such bad-faith action needs be cut off. As precedent, recall SCOTUS ordering DC to end its practical gun ban, which was done - and then a new practical ban promptly enacted in clear bad-faith violation of the ruling. The law in question was so egregious that SCOTUS needs to make absolutely clear “no you can’t do that, and y’all better not try it again - so let’s make this absolutely clear.”
I don’t trust Roberts to ever do the right thing.
Compromised blackmailed weak little fucher.
How can gun rights be expanded when the Second Amendment demands gun rights shall not be infringed?
You cannot expand a God Given Right unless a Tyrannical Government has attempted to take it away.
They are now admitting that we have Tyrannical Government at the State Level, something that we as Conservatives have known for decades.
Let me know when they finally admit the same Tyrannical label applies to the Federal Government.
They may and they may not.
SCOTUS could create a simple response this case. Not a “ruling” but an advisory to state legislatures. In effect, state what level of scrutiny will be applied to future cases. I would recommend that ANY law which attempts to reduce a citizens rights should face “strict scrutiny”.