They can “seem” to be against her all day but it has no effect until they let the senators know that a vote for her IS going to be recorded as an anti-gun vote.
That is the only club they have to hold over the senators heads.
My larger point was that the nomination presents a teachable moment, as to exactly HOW the Circuit Courts are lying their asses off about precedent, and getting away with it.
Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252 (1886): ".. the states cannot, even laying the [second amendment] out of view, prohibit the people from keeping and bearing arms ..."
Bach v. Pataki, 408 F.3d 75 (2nd Cir 2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1174 (2006): "Presser stands for the proposition that the right of the people to keep and bear arms, whatever else its nature, is a right only against the federal government, not against the states."
If a judge can't even READ the precedent, what business do they have behind the bench? And here, the Court is reading the case for the direct OPPOSITE of what it says.
And that fact is going to be lost in a bunch of mumbo-jumbo about "incorporation" that will fly right over the public's head.
thats what I mean..we might not be able to beat her, but lets make it closer than it is right now..so the US congress doesnt look like the politburo.