Gun Industry Cheers Justice Amy Coney Barrett

As you might expect, the firearms industry, gun rights orgs and firearms owners were very pleased with the confirmation and swearing in of Justice Amy Coney Barrett last night. Here’s a selection of some of their reactions.

From the NSSF:

NSSF, the trade association for the firearm industry, praised the U.S. Senate confirmation of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who was sworn into the U.S. Supreme Court by Justice Clarence Thomas in a White House ceremony. Justice Barrett fills the vacancy on the court left following the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Justice Barrett joins at least four other U.S. Supreme Court Justices who are rooted in originalism and interpret the Constitution as meaning today what it meant when it was drafted by the Founding Fathers.

“NSSF is extremely pleased with the confirmation of Justice Barrett and we are confident her service to the nation and the Supreme Court will have tremendous and lasting impact for decades and generations,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “Justice Barrett’s service will reaffirm the importance of originalist jurists when protecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans. The firearm industry is grateful for the resolute foresight of President Donald Trump to nominate such a qualified jurist to serve on the bench.”

Justice Barrett was reported favorably in a unanimous vote by the Senate Judiciary Committee when Senate Democrats abdicated their duty to vote and boycotted the committee vote, including Democratic vice presidential nominee Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.). Justice Barrett endured four days of committee confirmation hearings during which she deftly answered all questions and accusations by senators opposed to her nomination without the benefit of references or notes. Her mental acuity and comprehension of Constitutional law was on full display.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) held the Senate in session over the weekend, a rare occurrence, which set up the final vote held late Monday evening.

Justice Barrett listed a Second Amendment-related case, Kanter v Barr, as the most important opinion she authored. She dissented in that opinion at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Justice Barrett disagreed the with court’s opinion that non-violent felons who are not a public safety threat should be stripped of Second Amendment rights that are protected by the U.S. Constitution based on originalist interpretation of the law.

From the Second Amendment Foundation:

The Second Amendment Foundation offers its sincere congratulations to newly-sworn Supreme Court Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

“I believe the nation has gained a remarkable addition to the highest court in the land,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “We have truly witnessed history in the making, and we are confident her confirmation cements President Donald Trump’s fulfillment of his campaign pledge four years ago to bring balance to the federal courts.”

Justice Barrett’s confirmation came with a 52-48 partisan vote in the U.S. Senate Monday.

“The confirmation of Judge Barrett will help make the Second Amendment great again,” Gottlieb stated.

Gottlieb acknowledged threats from Democrats to stack the high court if Democrat Joe Biden wins the White House Nov. 3. The would-be president has refused to state whether he would try to stack the court, only saying he would make an announcement after the election.

“We’re delighted Senate Republicans stood firm against bullying by anti-gun Democrats to confirm Associate Justice Barrett,” Gottlieb said. “We now have an opportunity to restore the Second Amendment and reverse decades of increasingly restrictive gun control laws that have eroded the right to keep and bear arms.

“We wish Associate Justice Barrett a long, productive and historic tenure on the nation’s highest court,” he concluded. “This is a great moment for the nation, the Constitution and the American people.”

The FPC was thoughtful enough to remember that yesterday was also the former Secretary of State’s birthday and made sure to wish her many happy returns. So that’s nice.

 

 

comments

  1. avatar TommyGNR says:

    The lawsuits challenging the Constitutionality of gun laws in California, Illinois, New York, CT etc should begin immediately.

    1. avatar J says:

      We can only hope to see those anti-2nd Amendment state laws challenged and reversed. But, there are so many anti-2nd Amendment laws to challenge to correct the wrongs done to citizens by so many states. The Supreme Court can only hear so many cases a year. if only, we can count on Justice Roberts to move forward on 2nd Amendment cases. Good luck Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

      1. avatar anonymous4goodreason says:

        Don’t need Roberts anymore, he’s now part of the minority (leftists). It’s 5-4 without him. That’s what has the demonicRats’ bowels in an uproar.

    2. avatar JP Ruiz says:

      I think the PLCAA Lawsuits in CT and PA need to come first.

      There’s 5 absolute YES Votes to strike down wreckless lawsuits, but, Breyer and Roberts voted against wreckless lawsuits in previous SCOTUS Cases, so a 7-2 In Favor Ruling of the PLCAA seems likely.

      1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

        For reasons far beyond firearms you are absolutely correct.

    3. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

      Would need to check and see what we have in the system but wouldn’t be surprised if we had a few and I am sure California has a few in process already. The last round of refusals to hear took away most of what we had but fortunately (for this situation) there are plenty of commies that are cursing Ruth’s inability to retire as they wrote our rights off.

      1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

        We do. All of these are advancing, and all have been declared unconstitutional at the lower levels and now mired in the appeals process due to government not accepting the lower courts’ rulings:

        CA right to carry:
        Peruta v. San Diego
        Also see (falls under the same Ninth Circuit jurisdiction)
        Young v. Hawaii

        CA Ban on “Assault” weapons:
        Miller v. Becerra
        Rupp v. Becerra

        CA background check for ammo purchases:
        Rhode v. Becerra

        CA Ban on standard capacity magazines over 10 rounds:
        Duncan v. Becerra

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Also on open carry (which former Gov. Jerry Brown made illegal):

          This one has already been ruled as unconstitutional, just like the ones above, and is also waiting to be heard by the Ninth:
          Nichols v. Newsom

          Some people say they’ll never open carry. Fine. But here in L.A. County we have a LOT of mountainous hiking trails, a lot of coyotes and instances of attacks, as well as a history of Sheriffs who refuse to issue CCWs. I wouldn’t choose to walk with my gat on my hip down Hollywood Blvd and risk being stopped by every ignorant cop who responds to all the ignorant Karens calling 911, but I’ll certainly wear it in my home town and definitely on my trail hikes. You wouldn’t believe how many rural homeowners in the local canyons don’t see the importance of keeping Cujo within their property boundaries, and allow their snarling dog to lunge after you while you’re walking by in the public street. I currently carry bear spray. I prefer to augment that with a gun.

        2. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

          Is it bad to laugh maniacally and mutter “soon soon”?

  2. avatar guy says:

    I hope she puts California and other states with unconstitutional gun laws in their place and protects our 2nd amendment well into my childrens lives.

    1. avatar Scott C. says:

      And reels in the ATF

    2. avatar Anton Solomyr says:

      Step 1: Any state violating the U.S. Constitution, or the rights of the People it safeguards in *any* way loses 100% of its Federal funding.

      Step 2: After a 1 year probationary period, any State not making attempts (enacting policies) to come into compliance with the Peoples’ Rights outlined in the U.S. Constitution will see an increase in Federal taxation, scaled according to severity of their infractions.

      Step 3: After 5 years of noncompliance, a state loses its statehood, due to its breach of contract with the People (which the U.S. Constitution is), and once again becomes a territory, losing all electoral votes and voting power on the federal level (a la Guam, Siapan, etc.).

      Step 4: After 10 years of noncompliance, begin the federal trials for all those state officials who have violated the natural human rights of their residents. Mandatory sentences of 25y-Life without the possibility of parole at Ft. Leavenworth.

  3. avatar Stateisevil says:

    She is a statist, I think the gun boys are going to be sad in the end based on the fact the courts have allowed 98% of all gun control passed into law for 150 years.

    1. avatar Dude says:

      We’ve also had a liberal leaning Supreme Court for most of that time. Why do you think people are losing their minds over ACB’s confirmation? It isn’t because they think it will be business as usual.

  4. avatar GS650G says:

    Now we don’t have to care what Roberts does.

    1. avatar TFred says:

      Watch what happens. Roberts will shift back to the middle, voting WITH the 2A majority, so that HE can assign the author of the opinion, quite likely himself. That gives him the ability to limit the scope of any new pro-2A opinions.

      If Roberts votes in the minority, then the opinion author is assigned by the senior-most justice in the majority, which would be Clarence Thomas. Roberts will never let Thomas write a ruling opinion for a 2A case.

  5. avatar former water walker says:

    ACB is only 1 vote. As is Kavanaugh & Gorsuch. I’ll wait and see if any good(or pro-2A vote!) is forthcoming.

  6. avatar James Campbell says:

    We’re less likely to see Conservative value SC judges getting “Greenhoused” too. That’s when a judge would get such slanderous NYT articles written about them that they would start going leftard to stop the attacks.
    Those days are over now that everyone sees the failing NYT as the partisan rag that it is. It also helps that the Republican party has FINALLY found some backbone, and isn’t trying to be the “leftard light” party, attempting to get a few demoKKKRatic votes.
    This is the reporter who attacked those SCJs like Roberts.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linda_Greenhouse

  7. avatar Elmer Fudd says:

    I enjoyed the way Judge Amy Coney Barrett cleverly disguised the fact that she was giving the Democrats the middle finger extended by extending her other the fingers.

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      “…the middle finger extended by extending her other the fingers.”

      Wut?

  8. avatar DJ says:

    If you haven’t voted, vote Trump 2020.

  9. avatar Debbie W. says:

    The useful idiots are out in full swing saying how the POTUS put aside stimulas checks in favor of getting ACB confirmed. Of course the big stick in the mud for stimulas checks is nancy pelosi. She placed her self serving wants and desires above her useful idiot’s needs for a stimulas check. Perhaps useful idiots fear their democRat Party slave masters so much they’d rather blame others over fear of being shamed…They are not called useful idiots for nothing.

    TRUMP/PENCE 2020.

    1. avatar James Campbell says:

      What?
      I thought SanFranGranNan was feeding everyone in CA. That’s what she told Glenn Beck in an interview.
      I think she’s been giving people pints of $30 ice cream out of her $30,000 freezer.
      Trump/Pence 2020

      1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

        Rumor has it that the ice cream she stockpiles is green. Soylent.

        1. avatar anonymous4goodreason says:

          Good one Haz and probably true. And we can all guess what the chocolate the elite racist keeps for herself is made from!

        2. avatar James Campbell says:

          There sure would be plenty of that “flavor” if the Dems were to go unchecked.
          Trump/Pence 2020

  10. avatar ACAB says:

    She’s against qualified immunity for the police, too. This is why I voted for Trump. The man disgusts me but after he’s out of office, people like Kavanaugh and Barrett will still be here.

  11. avatar Montana Actual says:

    Constitutional carry nationwide.

    Then we’ll cheer.

  12. avatar TFred says:

    Two things to watch for:

    1. Chief Justice Roberts will shift his position back to the pro-2A side. This puts him in the majority, which preserves his authority to assign the author of the opinion. If Roberts votes with the minority, that shifts the opinion assignment authority to the senior-most justice in the majority, which would be Clarence Thomas. Mark my words: Roberts will NOT allow Thomas to write a ruling opinion on a 2A related case.

    2. Just as New York City did with NYSRPA, these folks aren’t stupid. The writing on the wall is crystal clear. The lower gun-hating courts and various state and local jurisdictions know full well what will happen if any of their gun-grabbing cases make it to SCOTUS. They will pull back a bit, looking for a sweet spot that allows them in infringe as much as possible without reaching that tipping point that sends the issue all the way to the top court. Hopefully there are enough significant cases already in the pipeline that one or two might get through, but look for the lower courts to radically shift their stance now that they know what will happen if one of these cases gets through to SCOTUS.

  13. avatar Fred Smith says:

    The Gun Industry also cheered DJT, who hasn’t been good for the 2A.

    1. avatar Dan Zimmerman says:

      Serious question…would Hillary have been better? If so, how?

    2. avatar TFred says:

      “The Gun Industry also cheered DJT, who hasn’t been good for the 2A.”

      Don’t you people EVER get tired of this drivel?

      THREE justices on the Supreme Court is GREAT for the 2A. There is simply no credible argument to the contrary. If Hillary had appointed these three, the 2A would be in a 6-3 hole, and that’s if CJ Roberts stayed on the right side.

      Knowing they had that ultra safe margin at SCOTUS would then “trickle down” to the lower courts and jurisdictions who would unleash a war on the 2A the likes of which we’ve never even imagined before.

      1. avatar anonymous4goodreason says:

        Of course none of that will matter if the demonicRats win this time. They’ll just pack the court and we will have gained nothing. Vote and vote republican across the board! Some RINOs will do the same as Roberts and switch back to the right if we win big.

  14. avatar Alan says:

    As you might expect, the firearms industry, gun rights orgs and firearms owners were very pleased with the confirmation and swearing in of Justice Amy Coney Barrett last night.

    Let’s hope that the expressed “good feelings” do not turn out to be misplaced.

  15. avatar Ben says:

    Can’t TTAG get a better photo of Justice Barrett? She is a 50BMG after all…don’t put a pic w shadow over her face.

    1. avatar John1269 says:

      Seriously what is that on her face? A shadow I’m sure, but it looks like a fuzzy demonic toungue.

      1. avatar John1269 says:

        Or an ink smeared handprint.

  16. avatar rdsii64 says:

    None of this means anything if Biden wins. The reason is if he wins the dems will try and succeed in expanding the court to more than nine seats to counter with their own liberal appointees. For justice Barrett’s appointment to mean anything, at least three things must happen.
    1) Trump has to win a second term so (2) and (3) have a chance.
    2) The constitutional amendment cosponsored by senator Marco Rubio to cap the court at nine seats must succeed.
    3) kill the bill to set supreme court term limits.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email