Think about it, commonsense says that a person who poses an immediate risk may be disarmed. That requires laws and a court. That implies and requires due process. The questions come in the application of commonsense--what establishes the threat is one issue, what court ruling a second, and lastly, the due process, e.g., when it ends, how to revisit.
And understand I own firearms, I am a firearms instructor, I shoot competitively, etc., so I'm speaking of direct personal interest. I believe in the Second Amendment. As well, I know there are some people that should not be allowed to buy, own, or possess firearms.
Anyone that dangerous should maybe be separated from society rather than allowed to walk among us, because guns aren’t the only thing such a person could use to cause great harm to others. Furthermore it is galling to make each of the rest of us prove we aren’t them, e.g. when trying to buy guns, rather than placing the burdens on them for being so dangerous.
I suspect SCOTUS neuters Chevron limiting agencies powers to effectively create laws and remands the Immunity case back to the lower courts. They will say that Presidents have immunity while performing their duties as President. Lower courts will have to explain why a charge is not considered Presidential duties. Then that will be appealed, effectively killing the cases against Trump until probably the summer of 2025 at the earliest. By the it will be mute. I also think J6 prisoner will get a win from SCOTUS, if not they will open Pandora's box, legally speaking.
It does not require a trial and weighing of the evidence, it is an ex parte proceeding.
And that can become self-authenticating: “he must be guilty of {fill in the blank}, he’s got a restraining order.”
I have thought about it. As usual, the phrase "think about it" is followed by utter rubbish.
commonsense says that
Common sense says that government can and will abuse any power given to it to oppress We the People. Just ask the people who stuck their necks out for then President Trump back on January 6, 2021.
That implies and requires due process.
Even Mr. Trump is in favor of disarming people first and having "due process" whenever. For the democrats, it will be disarmament first, "due process" never.
Then they shouldn't be out on the street.
Ridiculous. These types of orders can be had without even letting the 'accused' say a word in court in his defense. This is a grave miscarriage of justice. All it takes are the accusations of a single vindictive and evil woman. God bless Thomas. Screw the rest of them.
you totally discredit yourself with this bit of idiocy. If you are incarcerated, you lose many rights while you are incarcerated. Once you have done your time and paid your debt to society, you are merely another human being. The fact that the government thinks it can still take away rights granted to you by God, is an abuse of power.