@hankg except, the core problem here is that #Trump DIDN'T strong arm the GOP to get the bump stock ban through.
Trump just declared it himself, regardless of what the law said. That's the entire dispute here.
Had Trump strongarmed the GOP (well, Congress, whatever) to enact a ban, this wouldn't have been an issue.
The problem is that Trump acted in violation of law. The #SCOTUS called him on it.
@hankg the ATF wasn't reinterpreting a rule they invented. It was reinterpreting a law passed by the legislators we elected.
The job of the Supreme Court is ABSOLUTELY not to be reasonable. That's the job of the people we elect to Congress, primarily.
If we elect and reelect lawmakers making unreasonable laws, well, we should knock that off.
The job of the Court is to respect that we apparently want unreasonable laws.
That's democracy for ya.
@hankg I mean... facts.
But sure, have a nice day.
@hankg I think the key there is to reconsider just how much power Trump has when push comes to shove.
Yes, he has his cult of followers who are happy to believe and repeat that black is white, but so many serious figures with actual significance don't so much follow Trump as they try to deal with the gadflies that are such a hassle.
One example of this is when Trump has to reverse some dumb position he took because he didn't know how the world works. His cult will pretend he always believed that, but the significant figures in the GOP will have gotten in touch to correct him, as one does a small child.
But yep, this is an occasion when we should be loudly highlighting that with this ruling, Trump broke the law to take peoples' guns away (whether we want that or not).
It's the real way to marginalize him. Promoting him as powerful only amplifies his power.
@volkris He's gotten the entire party to go along with his the coup/insurrection being legitimate. He got congress to sink bipartisan border bills because he didn't want it to happen. He has a deathgrip on the party. Let's not pretend his hold is tenuous. Perhaps not *all* powerful, but pretending they don't step and fetch most of the time is not connected with reality.
On this particular thing, one last time, I disagree with your interpretation of how they decided to interpret the statute being egregious. I disagree with SCOTUS's finding on that as well. So did three other justices BTW. Perhaps with time and a different composition we can start unwinding some of this mess created by the Roberts court and these Republican hack justices.
@hankg he didn't, though.
It sounds like you're not familiar with the enormous amount of pushback Trump has received from Republicans on those topics, the criticisms he's received from the GOP about how he handled Jan 6th, the non-Trump related criticism of the border bills, and on and on.
I know a lot of people around here don't like to actually listen to Republicans, but these stories about what goes on in their party just aren't accurate.
Just for example, the border bill was being rejected by Republicans long before Trump said the first word about it. In fact, that's one of the tricks Trump does routinely, he'll see which way the wind is blowing, jump on the bandwagon, and then claim after the fact that it was him all along.
As for this case, SCOTUS didn't decide to interpret the statue being egregious. In fact, the justices were unanimous in accepting the statue, with even the dissenters embracing it in their dissent.
It's all there in the ruling.
