Dems threaten SCOTUS over upcoming 2A case

As the name indicates, this is the place for gun-related political discussions. It is not open to other political topics.

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 25649
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Dems threaten SCOTUS over upcoming 2A case

#16

Post by The Annoyed Man » Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:14 pm

crazy2medic wrote:
Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:09 pm
I know those Justices are cut from better stuff than me, but if I sat on that bench I'd rule against whatever the Dems wanted just because of their threat
The problem is that the court won’t likely get a chance to address it. The court does not have the constitutional authority to set how many justices will be seated. That authority resides solely with Congress....which can also override the veto of an uncooperative POTUS.

OTH.... nobody but POTUS has the authority to nominate a SCOTUS justice. So no matter what congress does during the Trump administration to try to pack the court, he can ignore them.
• Give me Liberty or I'll get up and get it myself.
• I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes.
• My dream is to have lived my life so well that future generations of leftists will demand my name be removed from buildings.
• Independent Minarchist.

User avatar

anygunanywhere
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 7496
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am
Location: La Grange, Texas

Re: Dems threaten SCOTUS over upcoming 2A case

#17

Post by anygunanywhere » Wed Aug 14, 2019 4:39 pm

The socialist commie (redundant) judges on the court don't mind being threatened because they are probably part of this crap. The (not really) conservative majority so far has not impressed me especially John Roberts.

Why would socialist commies be offended by socialist commies whining about the court and threats to make the court more socialist and communist?
"The Second Amendment is absolute...If we refuse infringement to our Right to Keep and Bear Arms, as protected by the Second Amendment, we will never be burdened by tyranny, dictatorship, or subjugation - other than to bury those who attempt it. B.E.Wood

User avatar

anygunanywhere
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 7496
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am
Location: La Grange, Texas

Re: Dems threaten SCOTUS over upcoming 2A case

#18

Post by anygunanywhere » Thu Aug 15, 2019 9:23 am

Liberal Justices Are Still Notching Victories Despite Conservative Supreme Court
UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh styled Justice Neil Gorsuch the “crossover sensation” of the court’s 2017-2018 term. The justice played to type again this year, joining his liberal colleagues to form a 5-4 majority in four cases.
https://dailycaller.com/2019/08/14/scot ... rossovers/
"The Second Amendment is absolute...If we refuse infringement to our Right to Keep and Bear Arms, as protected by the Second Amendment, we will never be burdened by tyranny, dictatorship, or subjugation - other than to bury those who attempt it. B.E.Wood


Papa_Tiger
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 708
Joined: Fri May 24, 2013 9:55 am

Re: Dems threaten SCOTUS over upcoming 2A case

#19

Post by Papa_Tiger » Thu Aug 15, 2019 10:28 am

anygunanywhere wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 9:23 am
Liberal Justices Are Still Notching Victories Despite Conservative Supreme Court
UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh styled Justice Neil Gorsuch the “crossover sensation” of the court’s 2017-2018 term. The justice played to type again this year, joining his liberal colleagues to form a 5-4 majority in four cases.
https://dailycaller.com/2019/08/14/scot ... rossovers/
Based on the descriptions of the cases that Gorsuch joined, I have to say I agree with the outcome and I have no love of most of what the "liberal bloc" of the SCotUS stands for. As much as I loved Scalia, I disagreed with him on some fundamental issues, particularly certain 4th Amendment cases. So I can't say that I'm surprised when many of the cases that Gorsuch agreed with the "liberal bloc" on had certain libertarian arguments.

User avatar

RoyGBiv
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 8129
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:41 am
Location: Fort Worth

Re: Dems threaten SCOTUS over upcoming 2A case

#20

Post by RoyGBiv » Thu Aug 15, 2019 10:36 am

anygunanywhere wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 9:23 am
Liberal Justices Are Still Notching Victories Despite Conservative Supreme Court
UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh styled Justice Neil Gorsuch the “crossover sensation” of the court’s 2017-2018 term. The justice played to type again this year, joining his liberal colleagues to form a 5-4 majority in four cases.
https://dailycaller.com/2019/08/14/scot ... rossovers/
Gorsuch's decisions siding with the lib Justices are better defined as libertarian.
I like Gorsuch WAY better than Kavanaugh. Was rooting for Kethledge to be nominated.
I am not a lawyer. This is NOT legal advice.!
Image
Nothing tempers idealism quite like the cold bath of reality.... SQLGeek


jerry_r60
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 6:47 pm

Re: Dems threaten SCOTUS over upcoming 2A case

#21

Post by jerry_r60 » Thu Aug 15, 2019 11:37 am

Grayling813 wrote:
Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:10 pm
jerry_r60 wrote:
Wed Aug 14, 2019 11:56 am
As was stated earlier, manipulating the number of Justices is how they can remake the court. Here is some quick history (from https://www.history.com/news/7-things-y ... reme-court)

2. There haven’t always been nine justices on the court.
The U.S. Constitution established the Supreme Court but left it to Congress to decide how many justices should make up the court. The Judiciary Act of 1789 set the number at six: a chief justice and five associate justices. In 1807, Congress increased the number of justices to seven; in 1837, the number was bumped up to nine; and in 1863, it rose to 10. In 1866, Congress passed the Judicial Circuits Act, which shrank the number of justices back down to seven and prevented President Andrew Johnson from appointing anyone new to the court. Three years later, in 1869, Congress raised the number of justices to nine, where it has stood ever since. In 1937, in an effort to create a court more friendly to his New Deal programs, President Franklin Roosevelt attempted to convince Congress to pass legislation that would allow a new justice to be added to the court—for a total of up to 15 members—for every justice over 70 who opted not to retire. Congress didn’t go for FDR’s plan.
Okay, they have a plan and it's Constitutionally allowed. Best of luck to them....having an overwhelming socialist SCOTUS doesn't mean 600 million firearms are going to be willingly turned in or confiscated.
Yeah, that's a separate question. Was just responding to your question about how they can remake the court if they had control of the WH and congress.


mayor
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 333
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2011 1:47 pm
Location: Wise county - N. of Fort Worth

Re: Dems threaten SCOTUS over upcoming 2A case

#22

Post by mayor » Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:30 pm

Rob72 wrote:
Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:51 pm
Grayling813 wrote:
Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:10 pm
jerry_r60 wrote:
Wed Aug 14, 2019 11:56 am
As was stated earlier, manipulating the number of Justices is how they can remake the court. Here is some quick history (from https://www.history.com/news/7-things-y ... reme-court)

2. There haven’t always been nine justices on the court.
The U.S. Constitution established the Supreme Court but left it to Congress to decide how many justices should make up the court. The Judiciary Act of 1789 set the number at six: a chief justice and five associate justices. In 1807, Congress increased the number of justices to seven; in 1837, the number was bumped up to nine; and in 1863, it rose to 10. In 1866, Congress passed the Judicial Circuits Act, which shrank the number of justices back down to seven and prevented President Andrew Johnson from appointing anyone new to the court. Three years later, in 1869, Congress raised the number of justices to nine, where it has stood ever since. In 1937, in an effort to create a court more friendly to his New Deal programs, President Franklin Roosevelt attempted to convince Congress to pass legislation that would allow a new justice to be added to the court—for a total of up to 15 members—for every justice over 70 who opted not to retire. Congress didn’t go for FDR’s plan.
Okay, they have a plan and it's Constitutionally allowed. Best of luck to them....having an overwhelming socialist SCOTUS doesn't mean 600 million firearms are going to be willingly turned in or confiscated.
That assumes that the some of the owners are willing to take a stand. I've said for a long time that, "welfare checks," anytime EMS goes to a home is the likely way it will start. If the property owner doesn't give them up voluntarily, and weapons are found subsequent to a search, the owner becomes ineligible for XXX government services (Medicare/Medicade, EMS service, etc.,etc..).

The only way that doesn't work is if LEO, as a whole refuses to pursue, and EMS/Fire, as a whole, refuse to ask/pursue. If jobs and benefits are on the line, are there enough with the character to step beyond political association (Dem/Rep) and support the Constitution? I am doubtful, at best.
Desperate people do desperate things. If something goes down, XXX government service won't be worth the oral diarrhea it took to promise it.


ralewis
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:37 pm

Re: Dems threaten SCOTUS over upcoming 2A case

#23

Post by ralewis » Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:59 pm

RoyGBiv wrote:
Wed Aug 14, 2019 2:36 pm
Will any of the liberal Justices speak out against this? :bigear:

Would be fun to hear RGB unload on these traitors.
RBG has actually said "9 is a good number" when asked about this in the relatively recent past. So she definitely isn't a fan.


Rob72
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2018 10:08 am
Location: Gulf Coast

Re: Dems threaten SCOTUS over upcoming 2A case

#24

Post by Rob72 » Thu Aug 15, 2019 1:49 pm

mayor wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:30 pm
Desperate people do desperate things. If something goes down, XXX government service won't be worth the oral diarrhea it took to promise it.
Desperate for food? Electricity? Medicine/medical care? How hard would it be to shut off rail and highway access into the DFW metroplex, until the, "community complies"?

"Something going down", in the context of civil unrest/revolt is vastly different than an EMP strike, virulent plague, asteroid strike, etc.. Look down your own street. How many neighbors are in cooperation to supply basic essentials to each other, in the event of any sort of crisis. How many would tell the police or NG where to go to find guns, so that they could have hot water & a working potty, if water & sewer were shut off?

User avatar

KLB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 813
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2016 10:57 am
Location: San Antonio

Re: Dems threaten SCOTUS over upcoming 2A case

#25

Post by KLB » Thu Aug 15, 2019 2:49 pm

crazy2medic wrote:
Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:09 pm
I know those Justices are cut from better stuff than me, but if I sat on that bench I'd rule against whatever the Dems wanted just because of their threat
I don't know about "better stuff," whatever that might mean. But my thoughts went down a related line. We might hope that, to discourage such thinking by Democrats, Democrat judges might switch their votes on certain politically charged cases to make the cases unanimous or nearly so.

We might hope, but we best not expect. Also, the case(s) would have to be carefully selected. I'm not sure what the criteria would be, and getting different judges to agree on a case, even if they agreed with the idea, might be impossible.

As it is, we'll probably muck along, and we'll get through this discord with our republic intact, or we won't.

User avatar

Topic author
AndyC
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 10767
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 12:34 pm
Location: Garland, TX

Re: Dems threaten SCOTUS over upcoming 2A case

#26

Post by AndyC » Fri Aug 30, 2019 5:13 pm

Dem Anti-Gunners Ripped by GOP Senate Majority over SCOTUS Brief
August 30, 2019 By Dave Workman

https://www.libertyparkpress.com/dem-an ... otus-brief
Remember Kitty Genovese

Image

Amateurs skip safety-checks - pros don't.
Preferred Travel Agent - 72 Virgins Dating Club, Iraq
There's nothing quite like the offer of 230 grains to a man's chest to remind him of his manners

Post Reply

Return to “Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues”