Gun Control Advocates Are Extremely Unhappy With Today’s Supreme Court Decision
In today’s 6-3 decision in favor of the Second Amendment, the Supreme Court struck down a New York gun-carry law that placed unnecessary burdens on citizens.
In writing the majority opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas stated “New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense.” Joined by John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett, Thomas led the Court to a solid defense of Constitutional rights.
However, in the wake of high-profile mass shootings like the recent Robb Elementary shooting in Uvalde, Texas, gun control advocates have voiced extreme displeasure at the ruling, arguing it will lead to more mass murders in the United States.
Noted Constitutional scholar and extremely sane online commentator (online because he can’t seem to hold a steady job as a commentator anywhere else) Keither Olbermann offered this take.
It has become necessary to dissolve the Supreme Court of the United States.
The first step is for a state the “court” has now forced guns upon, to ignore this ruling.
Great. You’re a court? Why and how do think you can enforce your rulings?#IgnoreTheCourt
— Keith Olbermann (@KeithOlbermann) June 23, 2022
He also followed that up with a profane attack on the conservative Justices (with a special guest appearance by his good, old-fashioned misogyny against Coney Barrett).
Several members of the legal and Supreme Court “expert” community are, meanwhile, confused as to what being a “right” actually means. Former US Attorney Preet Bahara claims “SCOTUS read neither the room nor the Constitution correctly.” CNN Legal Analyst and deviant Jeffrey Toobin accidentally stumbled on the correct answer when he stated “Second Amendment=First Amendment. You have the right to speak without prior permission from govt or regulation of content. So you have the right to carry a weapon without prior permission or regulations from govt.”
Then you have former acting U.S. Solicitor General Neal Katyal.
Gonna be very weird if Supreme Court ends a constitutional right to obtain an abortion next week, saying it should be left to the States to decide, right after it just imposed a constitutional right to concealed carry of firearms, saying it cannot be left to the States to decide
— Neal Katyal (@neal_katyal) June 23, 2022
Gonna be very weird if Supreme Court ends a constitutional right to obtain an abortion next week, saying it should be left to the States to decide, right after it just imposed a constitutional right to concealed carry of firearms, saying it cannot be left to the States to decide
It does not seem to be weird at all, in fact, considering that the Constitution says the right to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed” but does not say that about the right to an abortion. Some legal scholars might argue that this is due to the fact that the right to an abortion does not appear in the Constitution.
There is a lot of negative reaction to today’s ruling, which was released on the 74th birthday of Clarence Thomas, the author of the opinion. Twitter is very likely just going to remain a hotbed of bad takes for the foreseeable future, especially considering the long-awaited Dobbs decision is also on the horizon.
