[LibWhacker]

Infringe lightly? The Bill of Rights? They adore him in solid blue Boulder.

Is this guy another Roberts?

[samtheman]

“President Trump has made an outstanding choice in nominating Judge Gorsuch for the U.S. Supreme Court. He has an impressive record that demonstrates his support for the Second Amendment,” said Chris W. Cox, Executive Director, NRA-Institute for Legislative Action, in a statement.

---

I have to go with that support.

[NorthMountain]

“The Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to own firearms and may not be infringed lightly.”

You stuck an unconstitutional word in there, Yer Honor. But I fixed it for you. You're welcome.

[Celerity]

Just using the info in this article / piece the landscape is foggy. His opinion before mattered as a circuit judge. “Infringment not taken lightly” is spoken by someone at that level. As a SCOTUS this opinion would need to be re-evaluated because he can now state what “Lightly” and “Infringement” actually mean.

So these opinions could have been stated analytically at the level of law where he practiced. Now that he’s at the top, those levels should affect what he says, does, thinks and bangs the gavel on.

[FreedomForce]

I hope he’s not. I find it odd that a textualist would feel the need to add “lightly.”

[Grampa Dave]

Before trying to Bork this man, there is a total rebuttal of this article by the NRA re their support of Neil Gorsuch.

NRA Applauds Neil Gorsuch’s Nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20170131/nra-applauds-neil-gorsuchs-nomination-to-the-us-supreme-court ^ | Jan 21, 2016
Posted on 2/1/2017, 7:42:20 AM by KeyLargo

APPEARS IN News

Tuesday, January 31, 2017

Fairfax, Va.— The National Rifle Association (NRA) applauds the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to fill Justice Antonin Scalia’s seat on the United States Supreme Court.

“President Trump has made an outstanding choice in nominating Judge Gorsuch for the U.S. Supreme Court. He has an impressive record that demonstrates his support for the Second Amendment,” said Chris W. Cox, Executive Director, NRA-ILA. “We urge the Senate to swiftly confirm Judge Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, just as it did in confirming him to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit by a unanimous voice vote.”

During his tenure on the Tenth Circuit, Gorsuch has demonstrated his belief that the Constitution should be applied as the framers intended. To that end, he has supported the individual right to self-defense. Specifically, he wrote in an opinion that “the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to own firearms and may not be infringed lightly.”

“On behalf of our five million members, the NRA strongly supports Judge Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court. We will be activating our members and tens of millions of supporters throughout the country in support of Judge Gorsuch. He will protect our right to keep and bear arms and is an outstanding choice to fill Justice Scalia’s seat,” concluded Cox.

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3520050/posts

[Lisbon1940]

Does textualism include contextualism and/or subtextualism? I hope not.

[marktwain]

I hope he is better on the Commerce Clause than Scalia was.

I want another Thomas!

[Blue Collar Christian]

Seems a little Merrick Garlandish to me on his stance with police powers.

I don’t particularly like that.

[cld51860]

The ‘lightly’ phrasing disturbed me as well.

[Drew68]

They adore him in solid blue Boulder.

Do they really? What makes you say this?

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

No, we infringe upon the right to bear arms whenever we put someone in jail.

[JimRed]

Gorsuch Wrote That an Individual’s Right to Bear Arms Can Not Be ‘Infringed Lightly’

The second amendment does not address any degree of infringement beyond ZERO.

"...shall not be infringed."

[Rebel_Ace]

I see people already reacting in knee jerk fashion to the phrase "...and may not be infringed lightly..."

Laws and punishments ALWAYS infringe on natural rights. Do you have the right to be secure in your home with your possessions? Yes.

Can the police infringe on that right? Yes.

Unlawfully, they can just bust in whenever they feel like it, with little regard to the constitution. (Here they are treating the law "lightly")

Lawfully, police must obtain a search warrant, signed by Judge, with all the "due process" checks and balances. (Here they are treating the law "seriously")

So, this justice is saying, if you intend to infringe on someone's 2nd amendment right, you cannot do so "lightly", you had better follow due process in a constitutionally consistent manner. It cannot be merely on the whim of some low level government hack.

[Ancesthntr]

“The Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to own firearms and may not be infringed lightly.”

---

The last phrase’s meaning is clear to me: the 2nd Amendment may not be infringed for light (I.e. unimportant or non-compelling) reasons. IOW, the reason had better be damned good, like an officer disarming someone because he believed his life to be in immanent danger. Not because a gun “looks scary,”

Many here need to actually relax a bit and READ the quote before pronouncing judgment.