Senators Threaten Supreme Court on New York Second Amendment Case

Ammoland ^ | 16 August, 2019 | Dean Weingarten

[momincombatboots]

Well 3 of us on here do not trust our incredibly abusive government.

[robowombat]

More than just brazenness here. This is a direct threat aimed at the court. Something that has never really been done before. Lincoln contemplated arresting CJ Roger B. Taney for attempting to obstruct the federal waiver of habeus corpus. He was hesitant and Salmon Chase and others convinced him of the evil consequences of such an act. These assclowns are really juggling lit fusees in the powder magazine with this sort of mugging threat just like protection racketeer's.

[RatRipper]

The obvious attempts at power grabs by the Rats, showing that they have an insatiable lust for power makes me especially leery of them attaining power on any level. Their utter contempt for the rule of law on issues like border enforcement, the Kavanaugh confirmation and the Russian collusion hoax against Trump should be the canary in the coal mine sign for everybody. And that doesn’t even count what they have done to education on all levels, co-opting the media as their propaganda arm and the vast regulatory push for control of the masses under Obama. Democrats have shown themselves to be woefully untrustworthy and unfit to command the reins of power.

[zeugma]

Caetano v Massachusetts was referred back to the state (after a rather pointed hand slap at the state court). Do you know if it has been ultimately handled by the state?

[yoe]

Senators Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, Richard Durbin of Illinois and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York have filed an amicus curiae brief to have the Supreme Court dismiss the case of (New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. , v. City of New York.)

The usual Progressive suspects...Durbin, Blumenthal, Hirono, & Gillibrand; do these elected ever protect our Constitution like the swore they would?

[marktwain]

Caetano v Massachusetts was referred back to the state (after a rather pointed hand slap at the state court). Do you know if it has been ultimately handled by the state?

My recollection is the state refused to prosecute.

[zeugma]

My recollection is the state refused to prosecute.

Thanks. About what I figured. I'm sure they didn't even bother to apologize for persecuting this woman. She's out tens of thousands of dollars, and the state just drops it down a memory hole.