The SCOTUS didn’t overturn abortion laws; they overturned Roe v Wade. The U.S. Congress can make any abortion *laws* they like, but people cant rely on a ruling that RBG called the worst example of legislating from the bench.
They didn't "provide" presidential immunity to anyone. They AFFIRMED (they didn't GRANT) that all presidents have (any president, not just him), immunity for any OFFICIAL acts performed while in office. It does not cover illegal acts comminated with illegal intent (which is why Trumps charges were not immediately dismissed).
🙄🤦♂️ yall are so full of shit 😂😂😂😂😂 Yall don't even understand that they basically laid the groundwork for a dictatorship.. I guess as long as your team wins u don't care though
Why you should go out and vote this election; the issue is 3 of the conservative justices will be in their 70s and whoever is in office next term could have a huge impact on the law of the land/landscape with Supreme Court appointments. This upcoming election is actually very important for pro 2A. Especially since the Supreme Court didn’t weigh in on the Illinois all weapons ban case yet because they want it to work its way through the whole court system (which was expected for them to do honestly). The Supreme Court did sum up though and heavily implied that the AWB was unconstitutional but no ruling until the lower courts are done. Additionally marijuana users and gun rights were also punted for next president.
They gave them the answer to the question. If they figure it out, great. If not they will be corrected. I must keep the faith in the court, it's all we have left.
It irks me that these Constitutional scholars know full well AR bans are unconstitutional as it is an infringement. There is no doubt about that whatsoever, yet they fail to rule on this. What this means to me is that SCOTUS is a joke---they are there to rule on constitutional matters, my not doing so, they have violated their oath. I hang my head in shame this July 4th that a constitutional right is violented and these jurists failed to rule on it. If they cannot make this simple ruling ----goes to show the whole Supreme Court is just a political pawn.
Im having a hard time understanding all this. They already ruled on this in 2008 with Heller. They said you can't ban weapons "commonly owned and used" The only weapons that can be banned are "dangerous and unusual weapons like the m16". Well semi auto AR15 rifles and AK rifles are commonly owned and used and definitely not unusual in this country.
I don't understand how an M16 is dangerous or unusual. It is the issued primary fighting rifle of the US Armed Forces alongside the carbine version of the same, the M4. There's nothing dangerous or unusual about the rifle we're issuing to our soldiers. They don't have a tendency to explode on the operator, and they're not some kind of Frankenstein's monster of a weapon. They're select fire intermediate cartridge rifles. The ability to fire more than one round with a single function of the trigger is not dangerous or unusual in the modern world, it's the standard.
If you had been following the assault weapons ban lawsuits, you would have known that the Court announced, months ago, in response to 2nd Circuit writs, that it would no longer accept interlocutory cases. So, it should come as no surprise to anyone that they would not accept the illinois cases.
Scotus should be nonbiased in their opinions concerning the constitutionality of any case. They should do what is right regardless of who is in power or who might potentially get power later. If it's unconstitutional then rule that way and if it's not per the test in the Bruen decision then rule that way.
9 is ok. I just hate that they seem to make their decisions along party lines rather than by the constitutional standard. If they did that then the decisions would mostly be unanimous.
Another double hater! Howdy! You and your stance against Corporate Oligarchy. I am amazed at how frequently I agree wholeheartedly with you and glad you’re on YT. I do not doubt you are hated by other guntubers. I like ALL of my rights too. Fine vid David. Thanks
Surprise surprise the courts didn’t uphold their duty
The SCOTUS didn’t overturn abortion laws; they overturned Roe v Wade. The U.S. Congress can make any abortion *laws* they like, but people cant rely on a ruling that RBG called the worst example of legislating from the bench.
They had no problem providing Presidential immunity.
Presidential Immunity has already existed since the founding of that branch of government... The simply clarified the parameters.👍
They didn't "provide" presidential immunity to anyone. They AFFIRMED (they didn't GRANT) that all presidents have (any president, not just him), immunity for any OFFICIAL acts performed while in office. It does not cover illegal acts comminated with illegal intent (which is why Trumps charges were not immediately dismissed).
🙄🤦♂️ yall are so full of shit 😂😂😂😂😂
Yall don't even understand that they basically laid the groundwork for a dictatorship.. I guess as long as your team wins u don't care though
Why you should go out and vote this election; the issue is 3 of the conservative justices will be in their 70s and whoever is in office next term could have a huge impact on the law of the land/landscape with Supreme Court appointments. This upcoming election is actually very important for pro 2A.
Especially since the Supreme Court didn’t weigh in on the Illinois all weapons ban case yet because they want it to work its way through the whole court system (which was expected for them to do honestly). The Supreme Court did sum up though and heavily implied that the AWB was unconstitutional but no ruling until the lower courts are done.
Additionally marijuana users and gun rights were also punted for next president.
YOU ARE EXACTLY RIGHT!!! This is one of the MOST important responsibilities of the POTUS
If they could remove the 1A&2A, they would. That is just 2024 America.
They gave them the answer to the question. If they figure it out, great. If not they will be corrected. I must keep the faith in the court, it's all we have left.
SCOTUS been kicking ass lately, i have full faith
It irks me that these Constitutional scholars know full well AR bans are unconstitutional as it is an infringement. There is no doubt about that whatsoever, yet they fail to rule on this. What this means to me is that SCOTUS is a joke---they are there to rule on constitutional matters, my not doing so, they have violated their oath. I hang my head in shame this July 4th that a constitutional right is violented and these jurists failed to rule on it. If they cannot make this simple ruling ----goes to show the whole Supreme Court is just a political pawn.
ITS TIME FOR ALL AMERICANS TO END PAYING FOR INCOME TAX, PROPERTY TAX, AND THE DEATH TAX!!!!! SPREAD THE WORD TO ALL!!!
Yankee do you still think Biden doesn't have dementia?
Im having a hard time understanding all this. They already ruled on this in 2008 with Heller. They said you can't ban weapons "commonly owned and used" The only weapons that can be banned are "dangerous and unusual weapons like the m16". Well semi auto AR15 rifles and AK rifles are commonly owned and used and definitely not unusual in this country.
I don't understand how an M16 is dangerous or unusual. It is the issued primary fighting rifle of the US Armed Forces alongside the carbine version of the same, the M4. There's nothing dangerous or unusual about the rifle we're issuing to our soldiers. They don't have a tendency to explode on the operator, and they're not some kind of Frankenstein's monster of a weapon. They're select fire intermediate cartridge rifles. The ability to fire more than one round with a single function of the trigger is not dangerous or unusual in the modern world, it's the standard.
If you had been following the assault weapons ban lawsuits, you would have known that the Court announced, months ago, in response to 2nd Circuit writs, that it would no longer accept interlocutory cases. So, it should come as no surprise to anyone that they would not accept the illinois cases.
They did return it with instructions and they were very favorable.
Can’t wait to leave IL. Ugh!
this is supposed to be a secular nation
Scotus should be nonbiased in their opinions concerning the constitutionality of any case. They should do what is right regardless of who is in power or who might potentially get power later. If it's unconstitutional then rule that way and if it's not per the test in the Bruen decision then rule that way.
We The People need to cut the number of SCOTUS back down to 3 people. Paying 9 folks all this money to be useless is getting old.
Abolish the Supreme Court
I agree...
...Let's make two of them democrats while we're at it.🥴
9 is ok. I just hate that they seem to make their decisions along party lines rather than by the constitutional standard. If they did that then the decisions would mostly be unanimous.
Another double hater! Howdy! You and your stance against Corporate Oligarchy. I am amazed at how frequently I agree wholeheartedly with you and glad you’re on YT. I do not doubt you are hated by other guntubers. I like ALL of my rights too. Fine vid David. Thanks
First Project 2025 and now this….
What's 'Project 2025'?
Agreed 😁👍
It's a political football
Anyone who has a brain knows that
Both sides suck balls