Will this carry through to anti-2nd amendment laws?

[deen_ad]

Eric Holder tells state attorneys general that they are not obligated to defend laws they believe to be unconstitutional.

http://news.yahoo.com/video/attorney-general-takes-stand-against-223055863.html


Deen
NRA Life Member, Benefactor Level
Defender of Freedom Award
NRA Recruiter
Second Amendment Foundation Member
Washington Arms Collectors Member
Arms Collectors of SW Washington Member

"A gun is like a parachute. If you need one and don't have it, you'll probably never need one again!"

Read More

 

[Nwcid]

Eric Holder tells state attorneys general that they are not obligated to defend laws they believe to be unconstitutional.

Here is your problem in red. It does not say anything about what the rest of the country wants, just what THEY believe.

 

[timac]

That means the people also, if you feel a law is unconstitutional don't obey that law or laws. Connecticut citizens are doing just that.

 

[deen_ad]

That means the people also, if you feel a law is unconstitutional don't obey that law or laws. Connecticut citizens are doing just that.

That would be my hope too.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Holder's orders for his shock troops only apply to laws intended to defend what is left of the posterity of the Founders and their way of life.. such are of course in the commies crosshairs

As far as disobeying unjust laws, it's a duty of all patriots

 

[erudne]

The die was cast in 2008.
Obama will not leave the WH and he will not obey rule of law.
I think the progression of events is inevitable at this point. Civil War is his greatest desire, the physical destruction of America his wet dream

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Be careful what you wish for, comrades

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

Too bad the govt. ever got mixed up in the Marriage business in the first place. It just gives these bozos another issue to divide this Country. In answer to your question, YES this should carry over to anti 2nd Amendment laws. Also it will be sad to see Jan Brewer cave in on a business having religious rights too.

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

It's nothing but a political stunt. Holder has no control over the state AG's. I would like it if they refused to prosecute any laws that violate the state or US constitutions however I'm not going to hold my breath.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Be careful what you wish for, comrades

^^This!^^

Sorry folks, but the rule of law should be absolute, within the parameters of the legal system.
Not held outside of the system's purview.

The very notion that the United States Attorney General is suggesting that states' attorneys general ignore the rule of law should be abhorrent to any and all citizens. It flies in the face of logic, order, and good governance.

If an AG at any level wants to push for the abolition of a law, then they should do just that, and take any/all political lumps that come with it.
If he/she can cite consistent cases of jury nullification over a law to support that stance, then fine, take it before the legislature and get the law thrown out, or modified.
Jury nullification - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But to allow/advocate for the highest empowered law enforcement officer in any jurisdiction to ignore laws on a whim is a recipe for disaster.
Think dictatorial rule, and how this B.S. can/could/would be/is twisted to further political agendas.

Failure to follow the rule of law swings both ways, and I believe Holder is setting up a system that will allow TPTB the latitude to do as they damn well please, to the detriment of equal treatment under the law.
Like he did with Fast and Furious, the Black Panther voter intimidation case, and his pursuit of Geo. Zimmerman.

Blitz is exactly right. Be VERY careful what you wish for.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Unintended Consequences

 

[Stomper]

Oh, I believe the consequences are fully intended.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Oh, I believe the consequences are fully intended.

Not the ones I'm dreaming of

 

[Stomper]

This is attempting to set the "precedent" for an Imperial-style government, where the separation of powers are nullified and legislatures are made irrelevant. They already thumb their noses at SCOTUS rulings, hell I have even heard some progressives taunt the SCOTUS on who they were going to get to enforce their rulings.

Liberty often dies with thunderous applause...

 

[pokerace]

IT TS TIME!!!

 

[Kevinkris]

well i that at least in this case he is giving good advice. the constitution does prohibit making laws that will treat people differently just because they are different and banning gay marriage does just that. regardless about how you feel about that, at least we can use this same argument to defend the 2nd amendment.