Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Newsom's gun-control stunt – good TV, bad law
msn ^ | 13 dec 2021 | Jonathan Turley

Posted on 12/13/2021 10:55:55 AM PST by rellimpank

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-26 last
To: rellimpank

Will this Law allow us to SUE the State and Public Employee’s for Approving the Sale of these weapons??


21 posted on 12/13/2021 12:18:27 PM PST by eyeamok (founded in cynicism, wrapped in sarcasm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rellimpank; All

—sorry-—correct link-

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/newsom-s-gun-control-stunt-good-tv-bad-law/ar-AARK5Qg?ocid=msedgntp


22 posted on 12/13/2021 12:43:26 PM PST by rellimpank (--don't believe anything the media or government says about firearms or explosives--)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

Start with: “The Right to Keep and Bear Arms shall not be Infringed.”

Civil suits used as Newsom proposes are clearly intended to infringe. Newsom’s own comments can be used in court to prove the purpose was to circumvent the 2nd A. The test case will just be a waste of resources, with the Defendant winning court costs and attorneys’ fees.


23 posted on 12/13/2021 1:59:49 PM PST by Chewbarkah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Chewbarkah
Civil suits used as Newsom proposes are clearly intended to infringe.

Indeed they are. Just as the Texas law promoting civil suits against abortion providers are clearly intended to infringe.

Newsom’s own comments can be used in court to prove the purpose was to circumvent the 2nd A.

And the Texas law is clearly intended to circumvent Roe v. Wade.

The test case will just be a waste of resources, with the Defendant winning court costs and attorneys’ fees.

Depends. I know Texas is a loser-pays state but I don't know if California is. Regardless, I fully expect any suits filed under the Newsom law to meet the same fate as any suits filed under the Texas law - dismissed due to lack of standing.

24 posted on 12/13/2021 2:09:29 PM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

I don’t disagree with your points.

Though I view Roe as an important ruling limiting government power over individuals, and an affirmation of the Constitution intended by the Founders, it is a complex judicial interpretation built upon the 10th Amendment distributed via the 14th, and iteration of an “implied” right. It is subject to judicial re-interpretation. Not really on equal footing with a direct Constitutional Amendment.


25 posted on 12/13/2021 4:54:16 PM PST by Chewbarkah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

Stop spouting about stuff you obviously know nothing about. They’re not illegal. You have to pay the Federal tax.


26 posted on 12/13/2021 7:25:03 PM PST by backwoods-engineer (But what do I know? I'm just a backwoods engineer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-26 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson