Surprise. Surprise. That neoconservative little bitch John Roberts is going to side with the leftist judges (and RBG’s corpse) on this case which could have put overly restrictive and unconstitutional gun control laws to bed once and for all.
Now these far left jurisdictions will break the law and then retract it once it gets to the Supreme Court. This is setting up nothing but bad behavior.
The Supreme Court seemed unlikely to deliver a major win for gun-rights activists during arguments in the first significant Second Amendment case the justices had heard in nearly a decade.
Some of the court’s conservatives, including Justices Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito, seemed eager to use the case to address the reach of the Second Amendment.
But it appeared likely that Chief Justice John Roberts would side with the court’s liberals to dismiss the matter altogether as moot.
It was likely that the case would be dismissed as being moot. I’d hoped the case wouldn’t be and would be argued on the merits. However, when the case is dropped because the government entities walk back the laws… just enough to skirt the edges there isn’t much to do because they are within the confines of the law.
I remember during his confirmation hearings that the Democrats were convinced he was the second coming of the Antichrist. They couldn’t say anything positive about him or his family. They were convinced that he was going to push the court to the right. Now in retrospect, they couldn’t have been more wrong. Once he renders the decision and sides with the far left on the court he will be counted among their favorite people, somewhat like John McCain in his final days.
Pretty sure NYC changed the law in an attempt to keep this from going to the Supreme Court. The Dems are truly scared of this one to the point a bunch of senators penned a letter begged the SCOTUS not to take the case.
The case was challenging a New York City gun regulation that barred the transport of handguns outside of the city, even to a second home or firing range. After the court agreed to hear the case, though, the city did away with the regulation and the state passed a law that prevented the city from reviving it.
As the city ended it and the state made sure with a law to protect the transport of fire arms, there is no case to hear.
Why can’t the SC just cut to the chase with basic common sense. If you are a law abiding citizen with no questionable history; there should be no reason you cannot own a gun. Really nothing wrong with background checks. We have lightspeed systems to do that. Then again, all moot; since it will always be effortless to locate & acquire an illegal firearm & ammunition. I do understand the slippery slope when it comes to the mental health thing. That can be dicy if not interpreted correctly.
The case is the case. NYC ended the law that caused the case to go to the SCOUS and the state made a law to ensure it would never go to the SCOTUS again.
There was no longer a case to be head unless you want the SCOTUS to over reach.
The problem with this is states will keep infringing upon that which must not be infringed upon…then they will just walk it back when the legal pressure gets too high.
There has got to be a way to put a stop to that otherwise the far left will continue to abuse our justice system for their benefit. Meanwhile, the rights of the common citizen get trampled upon by leftist tyrants.
Yeah, we wouldn’t want judicial overreach happening or anything. That would be really bad for the country if it did. I guess the thousands of activist judges out there didn’t get the memo.
In the past many of the southern states did the same thing by passing discrimination laws and then repealing them just before the SCOTUS would plan to hear them.
In this way they could just keep passing and enforcing laws they knew were unconstitutional again and again.
I’m hopeful we’ll get a reasonable ruling in this case and that will put an end to similar laws being passed in the future and those in other states already passed will be invalidated.
I think it would be a waste of the Supreme Court’s time to listen to a case that has essentially been resolved. It takes an incredibly long time to get anything before the Supreme Court, and rightly so. The Court’s time shouldn’t be wasted with such nonsense. There is no aggrieved party and the formerly aggrieved have been made whole. As they say, there is no there, there.
