Staff Member
Gold Lifetime
- Messages
- 21,834
- Reactions
- 63,224
It looks like the Supremes aren't going to hear a couple challenges to California's bullplop gun laws: Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Challenge to California Gun Law
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No, but it's supposed to be.Isnt that their sole purpose, to handle state issues that goes against the federal law?
Justice Clarence Thomas gets it ...
Thomas scolded his colleagues.
"If a lower court treated another right so cavalierly, I have little doubt this court would intervene," Thomas wrote. "But as evidenced by our continued inaction in this area, the Second Amendment is a disfavored right in this court."
Thomas said he suspected the Supreme Court would readily hear cases involving potentially unconstitutional waiting periods if they involved abortion, racist publications or police traffic stops.
Justice Thomas said:The right to keep and bear arms is apparently this Court's constitutional orphan. And the lower courts seem to have gotten the message.
Nearly eight years ago, this Court declared that the Second Amendment is not a "second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees." McDonald, 561 U. S., at 780 (plurality opinion). By refusing to review decisions like the one below, we undermine that declaration. Because I still believe that the Second Amendment cannot be "singled out for special—and specially unfavorable—treatment,"
I actually hope that he will resign.Justice Thomas is a national treasure! I pray he wil turn down any and all invitations to spend time at country resorts on the US & Mexican boarder...