💥The fifth SCOTUS opinion today: United States v. Rahimi
Reuters: U.S. SUPREME COURT RULES IN FAVOR OF BIDEN ADMINISTRATION DEFENDING FEDERAL GUN BAN FOR DOMESTIC ABUSERS
2/ Of course, Thomas dissents
https://supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-915_8o6b.pdf
Done for today.
MacFarlane:
With no ruling from Supreme Court today: Half of the available pre-election time has expired
It’s been 137 days since the most recent court filing in USA v Trump
criminal case
It’s 137 days until the election
3/ Mystal:
This is the HUGE case about whether domestic abusers can have guns.
Looks like the answer is "no" 8-1, by Roberts, with a few concurrences, Thomas dissenting.
The way Roberts squared the circle with Heller and Bruen (the two awful SCOTUS gun cases) is "Those decisions, however, did not define the term and said nothing about the status of citizens who were not “responsible.”"
4/ Mystal:
Interestingly... the word "RESPONSIBLE" is found no where in the Second Amendment. But I guess conservatives are willing to read that word into the Amendment. Too bad they won't notice words that are actually in the Amendment... like "MILITIA"
@GottaLaff Despite their claims of interpreting the Constitution from the point of view of the framers, not only do they ignore the whole "militia" thing, they also ignore that guns at the time were commonly stored in armories, not in automobiles and under pillows or down one's trousers.
The #Republican puppets on #SCOTUS only care about gun industry profits and those sweet NRA gifts they neglect to disclose.
@bigheadtales The one has nothing to do with the other, though.
Even if guns were commonly stored in armories and not homes (which I'm skeptical of but nevermind) that doesn't mean the people who wrote the Constitution had a point of view that was limited to guns being relegated to armories.
The justices of the Court lay out their reasoning. We don't have to go on these conspiracy theories when they ride out the reasoning by which they came to their conclusions.
