Newsline

National Security , Newsline

Gun Rights, Supreme Court, and Congress

Posted on Friday, March 25, 2022
|
by AMAC, Robert B. Charles
|
28 Comments
capitol

Many think the US Supreme Court is under fire – they are right. In a revolutionary way, Biden and Congressional Democrats have called for undermining the Court’s authority and historic role in society, first through veiled personal and statutory threats, then pledges to “pack” the Court. If the Court rules to honor the original intent of the Second Amendment, the Court may come under fire again.

In short, Senators Schumer (D-NY) and others aimed to intimidate – or at least vehemently oppose – the High Court, primarily over abortion. Biden and Congressional Democrats have zeroed criticism on abortion, knowing a conservative majority could reverse Roe v. Wade in 2022. See, e.g., Schumer warns Kavanaugh and Gorsuch they will ‘pay the price.’

But another major issue – sure to be decided this summer – is the 2nd Amendment. Notably, one liberal justice – after retiring – wanted the amendment banned, while Democrats across the spectrum tend to oppose any interpretation that empowers individuals against the government or fits the original text. See, e.g., John Paul Stevens: Repeal the Second Amendment.

Now, while Supreme Court cases on the 2nd Amendment are rare, a major case is pending. In DC v. Heller, ten years ago, the High Court said the 2nd Amendment protects a gun at home for protection. Now, they are deciding, in a new case, limits on carrying outside the home. See, e.g.District of Columbia v. Heller.

The easy answer is a State – here, New York – should not be able to keep a citizen from self-protection with a gun outside the home, but this is being tested. In the new case, NYSRPA v. Corlett, the question is whether gun owners “who wish to carry a concealed firearm in public” may do so or if that right can be restricted into near non-existence. See, e.g., SUPREME COURT GUN CASES 2022: CONCEALED CARRY IN THE SPOTLIGHT.  

Put differently; this case represents a chance for gun owners nationwide to carry guns for self-protection through a “concealed carry” process, without arbitrary, capricious, or political intervention by a State to block or dramatically restrict that right. See, e.g., The US Supreme Court Is Set To Hear A Major Second Amendment Case/.

The outcome of the case will soon be known – and as with abortion, the High Court may totally rethink rights. Many feel that a proper reinterpretation – restoring rights earlier recognized – is overdue and that the High Court will allow more Americans self-protection in public.

All this raises a second question worth preparing for:  As with pro-abortion groups, how will anti-gun groups, and their political and media friends, respond to restored citizen gun rights?

The likely answer is not with enthusiasm, perhaps not respectfully. The 2nd Amendment case argued in late 2021 should be announced by late June 2022. It may announce a judicially conservative – Scalia-like – interpretation of citizen rights.

If the decision does support wider 2nd Amendment rights, prepare for political blowback. The High Court will be attacked, individual justices’ judgment, integrity, insulation from politics impugned, and summer and fall of 2022 will include gun rights as a major issue.

Anything else to expect? Only that most citizens – at a time of record-level homicides, drug trafficking, crime, and gun-buying – may favor the High Court’s empowerment of individuals to carry guns for self-protection. So, Democrats may find the institution under greatest pressure is not, after all, the High Court. It may be Congress.

Share this article:
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
28 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jerry Michael Barbour
Jerry Michael Barbour
1 year ago

I think that a person that wants to have a weapon to provide security for his family should certainly be able to. It is the second amendment right to bear arms. The founders of this great country would be turning over in their Graves if they knew what the liberals were trying to do with our rights.

Doc
Doc
1 year ago

Great insight and article

Spitfire?1940
Spitfire?1940
1 year ago

There is an estimated ,give or take,150 million law abiding gun owners in the U S A but only 5 million are NRA members. Complacency by those failing to support their God given rights to keep and bear arms will be what leads to confiscation.The complacent need to start carrying their share step up to the plate and be counted.I am an NRA life member,GOA member,a naturalized American citizen and served in the RAF. I take my rights very,very seriously.

Ed
Ed
1 year ago

It’s historically fact that well, people have there guns taken away, there is a government that eliminated the opposition and then it’s communism. The people suffer and then and only then the people realize it was wrong. The 2nd amendment is very important to our existence. This is why other countries don’t attack us because of the law abiding citizens in this country have guns

David Wells
David Wells
1 year ago

With so many states already having the right to carry open or concealed why is it that The Democratic states prohibit the right to carry. This states have the highest crime rates.

Don Brinks
Don Brinks
1 year ago

I certainly hope the ruling comes down in favor of individual rights to protect oneself outside the home. And I also hope that the certain attacks from the left that follow generate even more blowback against the left in November. But there is still EO 14019 to deal with: https://amac.us/newsline/society/bidenbucks-not-zuckerbucks-threaten-to-corrupt-the-2022-midterms/ And that could change everything for the advantage of the left. Time will tell.

Kay
Kay
1 year ago

This nominee is a marxist and should not be confirmed as the Court will be divided wherein no fair Constitutional decision can be made. We are living in a troubled time and so divided.

David Millikan
David Millikan
1 year ago

WE ARE AMERICANS. WE HELP AND PROTECT ONE ANOTHER.
NOT ATTACK ONE ANOTHER OR TRY TO DESTROY OUR COUNTRY. WE LIVE IN THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD WORTH FIGHTING FOR.
FREEDOM IS EARNED. NOT GIVEN.

John A Bird
John A Bird
1 year ago

          A LITTLE GUN HISTORY.. BE SURE TO READ THIS…
 
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control: From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
———————–
In 1911, Turkey established gun control: From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated
———————–
Germany established gun control in 1938: From 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
———————–
 
China established gun control in 1935: From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
———————–
Guatemala established gun control in 1964: From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
———————–
Uganda established gun control in 1970: From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
———————–
Cambodia established gun control in 1956: From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
———————–
56 million defenseless people were rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control.
———————–
You won’t see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.
 
Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.
 
With guns, we are ‘citizens’; without them, we are ‘subjects’.
 
During WW II, the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!
 
Gun owners in the USA are the largest armed forces in the World!
 
If you value your freedom, please spread this anti-gun control message to all of your friends.
 
The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defeat. The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either.
 
SWITZERLAND ISSUES A GUN TO EVERY HOUSEHOLD. SWITZERLAND’S GOVERNMENT ISSUES AND TRAINS EVERY ADULT IN THE USE OF A RIFLE.
 
 
SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!!!
 
IT’S A NO BRAINER! DON’T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL law-abiding CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET.
 
I’m a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment!

johnh
johnh
1 year ago

The Supreme Court should rule on cases, but they should not have to power to pass laws —-as that is the responsibility of our Legislative Branch & our elected officials.

DAVID MILLIKAN
DAVID MILLIKAN
1 year ago

“FIREARMS ARE SECOND ONLY TO THE CONSTITUTION IN IMPORTANCE; THEY ARE THE PEOPLES’ LIBERTY’S TEETH.”
-GEORGE WASHINGTON-

“A FREE PEOPLE OUGHT NOT ONLY BE ARMED AND DISCIPLINED. BUT THEY SHOULD HAVE SUFFICIENT ARMS AND AMMUNITION TO MAINTAIN A STATUS OF INDEPENDENCE FROM ANY WHO MIGHT ATTEMPT TO ABUSE THEM. WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT.”
-GEORGE WASHINGTON-
“THE PEOPLE ARE THE GOVERNMENT, ADMINISTERING IT BY THEIR AGENTS; THEY ARE THE GOVERNMENT, THE SOVEREIGN POWER.”
-ANDREW JACKSON-
“IF IT BE ASKED, WHAT IS THE MOST SACRED DUTY AND THE GREATEST SOURCE OF OUR SECURITY IN A REPUBLIC?
THE ANSWER WOULD BE, AN INVIOLABLE RESPECT FOR THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS.”
-ALEXANDER HAMILTON-
“…TO SECURE THESE RIGHTS, GOVERNMENTS ARE INSTITUTED AMONG MEN, DERIVING THEIR JUST POWERS FROM THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED.”
UNITED STATES DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE
“A NATION OF WELL INFORMED MEN WHO HAVE BEEN TAUGHT TO KNOW AND PRIZE THE RIGHTS WHICH GOD HAS GIVEN THEM CANNOT BE ENSLAVED. IT IS IN THE REGION OF IGNORANCE THAT TYRANNY BEGINS.”
-BENJAMIN FRANKLIN-

J. Farley
J. Farley
1 year ago

Any interruption of the 2nd AMENDMENT other than the words stated is an unconstitutional violation and should be struck down, it reads. “A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be Infringed.” First most people would agree the Militia would be the National Guard, the State Police, Sheriffs, and Local Police, as all would be a defense from enemy’s foreign and domestic. The people would be the Citizens of the United States, which makes it an individual right, the reasoning behind this is, if the people is an individual right in the 1st and 4th Amendments, our founding fathers were smart people they would not put the same words in a document and have them have two different meaning, to keep and bear arms, does not specify, or limit location, it just says bear arms. Only Dictator-Want-A- Be’s would want to eliminate the 2nd Amendment. Someone please tell, me what good it would do to dis-arm the honest law -abiding citizens when the bad guys will never give up their guns. For those who believe we should give up our rights, I only have one thing to say. YOU ARE STUPID, AND GO DO THE PYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO YOURSELF.
MY RIGHTS CAME FROM GOD!

Nobody’s Business
Nobody’s Business
1 year ago

Democrats don’t like the 2nd amendment because they are the government. They want to do things to us that we need a gun for. That’s as simple as I can put it so the idiot Democrats can understand.

MIKE FAILLA
MIKE FAILLA
1 year ago

The second amendment simply is a last measure to allow citizens to protect themselves from an over reaching government. Think of it like this: if they treat us this badly when we are armed, then imagine how bad they will treat us if they disarm us ?

nadine cornett
nadine cornett
1 year ago

I would think that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine (and the Ukrainian response) would make every gun-control advocate rethink their position and rush out to get their own firearm.

Bryan
Bryan
1 year ago

What would life be like if there were no enforced penalties for breaking the oath to protect and defend our constitution?

PaulE
PaulE
1 year ago

Affirming the right of average Americans to own guns should be a slam dunk, if the Court simply ruled based on the Constitution as written. As opposed to members of the Court taking such matters as their personal social lives, personal political leanings, potential negative press and media coverage and other assorted, non-judicial factors into consideration. The same holds true on a number of other rights as well. However, as we all know, the Court doesn’t always adhere to that standard of ruling simply based on what the Constitution actually says. As a matter of fact, adherence to the Constitution as written has become much more of an exception to the rule in modern times, than the norm by which the Court normally operates. Making the Court much more of a political barometer, subject to undo influence by external forces, than a rock-solid protector of the Constitution as written. As such, the pending judgements, in the cases you have mentioned, are all at best a coin toss right now. With the Court likely ruling to maintain the status quo for all the external, non-judicial factors mentioned.

AMAC’s Medicare Advisory Service
The knowledge, guidance, and choices of coverage you’re looking for. The exceptional service you deserve.
The AMAC App on 3 different iPhone
Download the AMAC App
The AMAC App is the place to go for insightful news wherever you are and whenever you want.
USDA Flag
Sam Johnson, official 109th Congress photo
President Joe Biden delivers remarks at the inaugural convening of the White House Council
Biden Abandons Christians Abroad

Stay informed! Subscribe to our Daily Newsletter.

"*" indicates required fields

28
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x

Subscribe to AMAC Daily News and Games