A few states are doing everything they can to resist the restoration of Second Amendment protections. Those oppossing an armed population claim the Supreme Court has explicitly approved of "Shall Issue" laws and "Regulation of Commerce in Firearms". It has not. It simply said it was not addressing those issues.
1 posted on
01/17/2024 3:39:21 AM PST by
marktwain
To: marktwain
Exactly HOW many ways can “Shall Not Be Infringed” be parsed?
2 posted on
01/17/2024 4:18:35 AM PST by
Qwapisking
("IF the Second goes first the First goes second" L.Star )
To: marktwain
The People’s Republic is at the head of the pack.
I’m so proud.
4 posted on
01/17/2024 4:44:12 AM PST by
sauropod
(The obedient always think of themselves as virtuous rather than cowardly.)
To: marktwain
The original panel struck down Maryland's restrictions. Now the Fourth Circuit is imitating the Ninth by deciding to hold an en banc review in order to overturn the original panel's decision.
Meanwhile the Seventh Circuit invents a new legal category of "military arms" not present in the Constitution, the laws, or prior precedent in order to uphold Illinois' patently unconstitutional and sweeping semi-automatic rifle ban. Note that the specious category of "military arms" imitates the Dems' gun control mantra verbatim.
We have several circuits more or less in open revolt against Bruen but SCOTUS does nothing.
5 posted on
01/17/2024 6:32:51 AM PST by
pierrem15
("Massacrez-les, car le seigneur connait les siens" )
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson