View Full Version : Supreme Court Turns away ALL Second Amendment Cases
https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-refuses-hear-challenge-140235652.html
Do you understand yet? Really, do YOU UNDERSTAND?
There is a war going on in this country. You may not believe it- you're wrong. You may not think it has anything to do with you- but sticking your head in the sand is a sure way to get your ass kicked.
Don't worry, the gods of DC had time to protect the rights of sodomites and trannies. Gorsuch and Roberts...taking up the mantle of David Souter. The republic is safe now.
PracticalRifleman
06-15-20, 10:34
I remember when not supporting Trump was answered with “but muh justice picks!”
How’s that working out for you now?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BoringGuy45
06-15-20, 10:39
Roberts is a dickless coward.
Sometimes Trump's picks seem OK...and other times, not at all. The mind of men is a perturbing thing.
Roberts is a dickless coward.
Roberts is turning out to be a stupid and evil dickless coward.
I remember when not supporting Trump was answered with “but muh justice picks!”
How’s that working out for you now?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
We got 50% at least....
teufelhund1918
06-15-20, 10:46
Wow. This country is really turning on it's head quickly. Regardless, it still takes some mind numbed robot to show up and take that weapon from your hands. Good luck there.
Wow. This country is really turning on it's head quickly. Regardless, it still takes some mind numbed robot to show up and take that weapon from your hands. Good luck there.
Why do you think they emptied the prisons in some states? It's coming....
SomeOtherGuy
06-15-20, 10:53
Wow. This country is really turning on it's head quickly. Regardless, it still takes some mind numbed robot to show up and take that weapon from your hands. Good luck there.
Police can't confiscate "outlawed" guns if there are no police!!! You can thank BLM / Soros / Antifa for your 2A!!! Hahaha
/sarc
Seriously, if you don't see a massive push for a Red-guards / Gestapo / SS type political "police" force, you need to start paying attention. Obama promised as much a decade ago, and it's easy to read between the lines of the current fringe calls for abolishing police.
Police can't confiscate "outlawed" guns if there are no police!!! You can thank BLM / Soros / Antifa for your 2A!!! Hahaha
/sarc
Seriously, if you don't see a massive push for a Red-guards / Gestapo / SS type political "police" force, you need to start paying attention. Obama promised as much a decade ago, and it's easy to read between the lines of the current fringe calls for abolishing police.
Yea, it's not like this is "new" playbook. When people like Obama say things, it's not random nonsense. Everything is measured, tested etc...they know exactly what they are doing. It's no different than Hitler writing Mein Kampfh. They literally TOLD US what they are going to do. Why is that so hard for so many people to understand given the obvious historical examples? This shit HAPPENED BEFORE, We've been told they intend to DO IT AGAIN, and it's ACTUALLY HAPPENING.....I've heard and read of people walking into the gas chambers in complete disbelief- I never thought that would be possible again, but I fear I'm wrong.....
Wait. Did you really expect them to take on these cases after rejecting the NYC case last month? Come on guys.
Wait. Did you really expect them to take on these cases after rejecting the NYC case last month? Come on guys.
Yes, as an attorney I can honestly say that Legally, their decision to turn away the NYC case was appropriate. Or, if not appropriate it certainly was on very strong legal grounds. I fully expected it to be rejected. These other cases- involving LIVE cases and controversies, not hardly. Given the absolute number at least one of them should have been taken up. It tells you all you need to know.
Yes, as an attorney I can honestly say that Legally, their decision to turn away the NYC case was appropriate. Or, if not appropriate it certainly was on very strong legal grounds. I fully expected it to be rejected. These other cases- involving LIVE cases and controversies, not hardly. Given the absolute number at least one of them should have been taken up. It tells you all you need to know.
SCOTUS refused to hear Peruta, they refused to hear Drake, I don't know why you guys are so surprised?
If I recall correctly, they have refused to hear ANY 2A case since McDonald, 10 years ago.
Adrenaline_6
06-15-20, 11:47
Not sure if this is what's happening, but due Robert's and his missing dick, it probably wold be more ideal if we wait, pending Trump's re-election to replace Ginsberg with another conservative. This would render Roberts and his missing dick inconsequential.
Hedging their bets against Trump losing in November?
PracticalRifleman
06-15-20, 12:23
Not sure if this is what's happening, but due Robert's and his missing dick, it probably wold be more ideal if we wait, pending Trump's re-election to replace Ginsberg with another conservative. This would render Roberts and his missing dick inconsequential.
Yeah if we have another Trump pick maybe one of them may be on our side? [emoji23]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Just wait until the court is stacked (D) however many years from now. Trust me, they will start hearing 2nd cases then.
Adrenaline_6
06-15-20, 13:33
Yeah if we have another Trump pick maybe one of them may be on our side? [emoji23]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Maybe...maybe not, but SCOTUS rulings set precedent. You need to skillfully decide when to hear those cases, because this affects further rulings in a similar manner.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-refuses-hear-challenge-140235652.html
Do you understand yet? Really, do YOU UNDERSTAND?
There is a war going on in this country. You may not believe it- you're wrong. You may not think it has anything to do with you- but sticking your head in the sand is a sure way to get your ass kicked.
sarcasm inbound
come on get over it we all know we don't need guns that what the police are for since they are trained :)
so all we have to do is call the police (cough cough what 911 I got a counselor what defunded police there are no police OH NO)
sarcasm off
yeah I read that today and with as mentioned above prisoners being released defunding of cops building up of BLM police now funded with billions of dollars and gov backing etc...
as obama started the hatred of the police and his saying this
We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded
I reckon this is coming true now its not obama himself he was like many others along the way part of the bigger group of socialist/communist/progressive they change names like a model does shoes
I do often wonder if what the Russians thought with the collapse of the USSR and how quick it happened ? I know we are not them but take any great nation toppling and reforming itself are we next ?
Phillygunguy
06-15-20, 15:53
**** it. Every gun owner should do like BLM and protest all across the county.
Diamondback
06-15-20, 16:46
Th other possibility is Gorsuch made it a 6-3 because of knowing that if they got the four needed for Cert Roberts would probably shit the bed and side with his rumored-kiddie-diddling Leftist butt-buddies again.
Straight Shooter
06-15-20, 20:08
Th other possibility is Gorsuch made it a 6-3 because of knowing that if they got the four needed for Cert Roberts would probably shit the bed and side with his rumored-kiddie-diddling Leftist butt-buddies again.
I JUST downloaded a bunch of court documents on this very thing- gonna be a bit before I can read and go over them more thoroughly. It seems VERY likely he has been compromised.
Gorsuch and Roberts are liars. They're activist judges.
I remember when not supporting Trump was answered with “but muh justice picks!”
How’s that working out for you now?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Cause Obama picks followed by Hillary picks would have been better? We really need to get rid of Ginsburg.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-refuses-hear-challenge-140235652.html
Do you understand yet? Really, do YOU UNDERSTAND?
There is a war going on in this country. You may not believe it- you're wrong. You may not think it has anything to do with you- but sticking your head in the sand is a sure way to get your ass kicked.
Are you referring to a war on guns?
Why do you think they emptied the prisons in some states? It's coming....
What does this mean?
PracticalRifleman
06-16-20, 06:33
Cause Obama picks followed by Hillary picks would have been better? We really need to get rid of Ginsburg.
So far it seems Republicans aren’t picking better justices than the democrats. And what’s worse, they’ve decided they can now legislate from the bench.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So far it seems Republicans aren’t picking better justices than the democrats. And what’s worse, they’ve decided they can now legislate from the bench.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think they decided that years ago.
Andy
I had a county judge tell me years ago the Supreme Court isn’t right, it’s last. It’s only as good as the judges and apparently either the establishment gets to the good judges or the ones which were assumed to be good judges weren’t.
So far it seems Republicans aren’t picking better justices than the democrats. And what’s worse, they’ve decided they can now legislate from the bench.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Republican nominees have been the supreme Court majority since at least Nixon, possibly Eisenhower. I know it shifted (R) and has stayed since 1 of the 2.
SomeOtherGuy
06-16-20, 08:32
I had a county judge tell me years ago the Supreme Court isn’t right, it’s last. It’s only as good as the judges and apparently either the establishment gets to the good judges or the ones which were assumed to be good judges weren’t.
He was trying to copy a famous quote of Justice Robert Jackson:
We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible only because we are final.
https://harvardlawreview.org/2014/12/the-nonfinality-of-supreme-court-opinions/
Are you referring to a war on guns?
Why do you think they emptied the prisons in some states? It's coming....
What does this mean?
It means that historically Leftists have used convicts and criminals to deal with their enemies. These people are used as muscle to topple governments and to punish those who support them and political enemies of the movement. Right now this nation and it's culture and history is being attacked. Before they can raise up a new order they must destroy and discredit the old one. It always ends the same way- with the enemies of the revolution digging their own graves and kneeling next to them waiting for the bullet or hammer..... This is nothing new. That people cannot see this for what it is is pretty disturbing.
SomeOtherGuy
06-16-20, 08:36
deleted; nevermind
The two so-called conservative/originalist justices managed to interpret the 1964 Civil Rights Act...the part about sex...to include sexual orientation and transgenderism. The original law, in the context of when it was written had absolutely nothing to do with those two things...it meant men and women. They totally made up and applied their own bogus view on the law. That is without a doubt legislating from the bench and the other, actual, conservatives called them out on it. This doesn't bode well for the 2nd. I have zero confidence that these two will get it right. They showed this time around a total unwillingness to take on the 2nd and even if and when they do, it'll be a crap shoot what they will decide.
Straight Shooter
06-17-20, 07:56
Wouldnt it be an absolute HOOT if Trump were to win again..and decides to do what the demonrats threatened to do awhile back..and added a couple more conservative{ hopefully REAL ones} justices for a total of 11?
What a kick in the pants that would be.
Could that happen in the Senate alone, or would both the House & Senate need to act together on that?
Diamondback
06-17-20, 09:00
Wouldnt it be an absolute HOOT if Trump were to win again..and decides to do what the demonrats threatened to do awhile back..and added a couple more conservative{ hopefully REAL ones} justices for a total of 11?
What a kick in the pants that would be.
Could that happen in the Senate alone, or would both the House & Senate need to act together on that?
If memory serves, you'd need the "Triple Crown" to do it--as a practical matter, you'd need blowout conservative majorities to overcome the Rockefeller Wing playing "Junior Coalition Partner" with the D's.
Is there any doubt left that Roberts is a leftist? Not in my mind.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/06/18/supreme-court-preserves-daca-work-permits-for-700000-illegal-immigrants/
teufelhund1918
06-18-20, 10:26
Is there any doubt left that Roberts is a leftist? Not in my mind.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/06/18/supreme-court-preserves-daca-work-permits-for-700000-illegal-immigrants/
Or something more sinister than that. Wasn't there something brought up that people were thinking that he has been blackmailed or intimidated by something in his past to change his opinion on the Obamacare mandate? Don't know what ever became of that story, but I can't find it on the internet.
Or something more sinister than that. Wasn't there something brought up that people were thinking that he has been blackmailed or intimidated by something in his past to change his opinion on the Obamacare mandate? Don't know what ever became of that story, but I can't find it on the internet.
I vaguely remember something to that effect. I have no idea if it's true or not.
teufelhund1918
06-18-20, 10:42
The little bit I did find concerns some sketchy procedures in his adoption of two kids and the Obamas using that to blackmail him to swing his vote on the Obamacare mandate even though he was against it and said it was illegal... and he did this twice. It is weird that he was nominated under the premise that he was a conservative justice and has pretty much voted left of center. These days, anything is possible.
Diamondback
06-18-20, 10:59
Roberts = Earl Warren 2.0. Gorsuch, I'm not sure if he's a new Anthony Kennedy or a new David Souter... probably he's Souter Redux and Kavanaugh is Kennedy: TNG. One thing's for sure, whoever recommended Gorsuch needs to be shitcanned so hard his ass breaks through the ground in China.
Where's our Second Coming of Scalia we really need? And how did the Federalist Society and Heritage not filter out these turds? Shoulda gone straight to Amy Coney Barrett... better yet, call "Doomsday Clause" Kozinski out of retirement since he was he only "2A Absolutist" judge I remember.
The little bit I did find concerns some sketchy procedures in his adoption of two kids and the Obamas using that to blackmail him to swing his vote on the Obamacare mandate even though he was against it and said it was illegal... and he did this twice. It is weird that he was nominated under the premise that he was a conservative justice and has pretty much voted left of center. These days, anything is possible.
Why can't our side ever get a turncoat Democrat-nominated justice? It seems like it ALWAYS goes against us.
Diamondback
06-18-20, 11:27
Why can't our side ever get a turncoat Democrat-nominated justice? It seems like it ALWAYS goes against us.
Because our side doesn't have the balls for dubious or extralegal activities like honeypotting, blackmail etc. the way TWANLOC do.
teufelhund1918
06-18-20, 12:14
Why can't our side ever get a turncoat Democrat-nominated justice? It seems like it ALWAYS goes against us.
??? dunno. The Republicans control two of the three branches of the gubbamint and the lunatic dems run circles around them continually. My only explanation is that the republicans say one thing in public, but work dirty back room deals over drinks and ciggies in the back room. How many of them have really backed Trump during his 4 years?
Because it's easier for a man to aspire to the lowlife. It takes a lot of personal work to aspire to the high life.
Why can't our side ever get a turncoat Democrat-nominated justice? It seems like it ALWAYS goes against us.
Because the establishment within the GOP isn't really on our side either.
George W. Bush, who nominated Roberts, is/was an excellent example.
Adrenaline_6
06-18-20, 12:27
??? dunno. The Republicans control two of the three branches of the gubbamint and the lunatic dems run circles around them continually. My only explanation is that the republicans say one thing in public, but work dirty back room deals over drinks and ciggies in the back room. How many of them have really backed Trump during his 4 years?
Less than people like to think. Many are going through the motions and biding their time for his exit. Whether it be 2020 or 2024. If no other candidate steps up to continue the anti globalist effort, the "swamp" will be back to business as usual from both sides. The Repubs controlled all 3 and did nothing, because McConnell and the rest of the cronies never wanted to.
Because the establishment within the GOP isn't really on our side either.
George W. Bush, who nominated Roberts, is/was an excellent example.
I'm thinking about the likes of Warren, Stevens, and Souter. All nominated by Republican presidents, all became liberal as hell once on the court. Now we have borderline Roberts and had wishy-washy Kennedy and O'Connor.
Can you name even one SCOTUS justice nominated by a Democrat that ended up being conservative, or even somewhat?
Because the establishment within the GOP isn't really on our side either.
George W. Bush, who nominated Roberts, is/was an excellent example.
Numerous former Bush Administration officials and many Bush Dynasty acolytes are openly urging Republicans to vote for Biden, to the point they're forming anti-Trump PAC's and raising money to get Biden elected.
A real Republican would never do that.
I'm thinking about the likes of Warren, Stevens, and Souter. All nominated by Republican presidents, all became liberal as hell once on the court. Now we have borderline Roberts and had wishy-washy Kennedy and O'Connor.
Can you name even one SCOTUS justice nominated by a Democrat that ended up being conservative, or even somewhat?
Used to be Republicans would reach across the aisle and appoint certain judges the Democrats would approve of, in exchange for votes on important GOP policy initiatives. The Dems rarely if ever reciprocated, which is why you haven't seen a Dem nominated SCOTUS judge become more moderate to conservative.
I'm pretty sure that era is gone completely. Only some weal-kneed GOPe RINO would nominate a mod/lib justice now.
Adrenaline_6
06-18-20, 14:13
Numerous former Bush Administration officials and many Bush Dynasty acolytes are openly urging Republicans to vote for Biden, to the point they're forming anti-Trump PAC's and raising money to get Biden elected.
A real Republican would never do that.
They are showing their true Globalist agenda. Under normal conditions, they would never do that, just play along like wolves in sheep's clothing. That day has passed. They must be really desperate.
I'm thinking about the likes of Warren, Stevens, and Souter. All nominated by Republican presidents, all became liberal as hell once on the court. Now we have borderline Roberts and had wishy-washy Kennedy and O'Connor.
Can you name even one SCOTUS justice nominated by a Democrat that ended up being conservative, or even somewhat?
No, I can't think of a single one. And I'd say glocktogo hits the nail on the head as to why:
Used to be Republicans would reach across the aisle and appoint certain judges the Democrats would approve of, in exchange for votes on important GOP policy initiatives. The Dems rarely if ever reciprocated, which is why you haven't seen a Dem nominated SCOTUS judge become more moderate to conservative.
I'm pretty sure that era is gone completely. Only some weal-kneed GOPe RINO would nominate a mod/lib justice now.
^^^ Bingo.
Numerous former Bush Administration officials and many Bush Dynasty acolytes are openly urging Republicans to vote for Biden, to the point they're forming anti-Trump PAC's and raising money to get Biden elected.
A real Republican would never do that.
A real Neo-con would.
SCOTUS is obviously doing “as they’re told.”
They have betrayed their oath, the nation, and We The People over, and over, and over again.
Traitors.
Going to go with every now and then a republican screws up and nominates a Thomas.
One of the most assinine(or more likely, dishonest) arguments I ever heard was the crowd clamoring for McCain's future court nominees like he was going to want someone that opposed his wrong doing in a position to erase his life long activities.
You do things out of necessity at the time.....I voted for old man Bush (twice) as well as his son (twice also). Now hindsight is, as they say, 20/20 but you have to put things into perspective. We had Dukakis, then Clinton vs Bush I and then it was Gore followed by Kerry vs Bush II. I still don't regret my votes based on the era they occurred in but DAMN, why always such shitty choices? FWIW my sentiments were for Cruz in 2016 but I did hit the lever for Trump, and all that has come with it. I will do so again this November just to see libtard heads explode. :sarcastic:
Yep, SCOTUS picks come with the territory, and if your pic for President is a "lesser of two evils" that will likely reflect who is nominated as a new Justice. It is what it is, but I don't like it one bit. :mad:
McCain's claimed future court picks were never claimed to be the lesser of 2 evils, but strict constructionists. That gets claimed for every Republican candidate.
In McCain's case, that claim was getting made in February/March 2008, well before he was (at least as far as the general public knew) the Republican candidate.
The Dumb Gun Collector
06-18-20, 18:19
"Elite" culture is Left Wing. Supreme Court justices are celebrities, and they want to read nice things about themselves in the NYT and the WaPO. If you want to hear about how you are a genius in all the best circles, just drift left. Take this gay rights thing. That is obviously the way things are going. Why make an ass of yourself and be reviled in the history books just so you can delay the inevitable a few years over some quaint concerns about what some old piece of paper says? Just go ahead and vote with the left and they will write plays about you that you can take your wife and kids to when you go to NYC.
titsonritz
06-26-20, 15:06
The bitched be emboldened...
AG’s in 16 States Embrace Background Checks On Ammo Purchases (https://bearingarms.com/cam-e/2020/06/24/ags-states-checks-ammo-purchases/)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYeGqqYCthw&feature=emb_title
We need two more real judges. Roberts...eat a bag of dicks.
The bitched be emboldened...
AG’s in 16 States Embrace Background Checks On Ammo Purchases (https://bearingarms.com/cam-e/2020/06/24/ags-states-checks-ammo-purchases/)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYeGqqYCthw&feature=emb_title
We need two more real judges. Roberts...eat a bag of dicks.
I read the list of states that want this and my first thought was “no surprise, the usual suspects”. However, if the ComDems get control of Congress and the presidency they will probably ram it through on the federal level.
Diamondback
06-26-20, 15:39
We need two more real judges. Roberts...eat a bag of dicks.
Preferably more, I have little faith in Gorsuch or Kavanaugh. What we really need is to send Scalia's remains to that cloning facility in Star Wars... or send Thomas to be a template.
Maybe the federal courts aren’t the venue to “get our rights back.” As if they had a say.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-refuses-hear-challenge-140235652.html
Do you understand yet? Really, do YOU UNDERSTAND?
There is a war going on in this country. You may not believe it- you're wrong. You may not think it has anything to do with you- but sticking your head in the sand is a sure way to get your ass kicked.
Good.
With Roberts we likely would have lost them all 5:4.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.