SCOTUS: The Court Of No Resort

On Monday, the US Supreme Court released ORDER LIST: 590 U.S. and denied certiorari on all ten Second Amendment cases that were pending.

All of them. Bans on carrying outside the home, out-of-state handgun purchases, firearm and magazine bans and restrictions. They had, of course, previously mooted NYSRPA v. City of New York, declining to do their bloody job. Some see this as confirming Justice Thomas’s assessment of the Second Amendment as a second class right.

Hearing a case and ruling against a Second Amendment defense might be better than this. A definite, clear ruling would at least set uniform standards for victim-disarmament across the country, instead of the mishmash of conflicting Circuits we are currently afflicted with.

But the SCOTUS wouldn’t grow a backbone and make even one decision in any of the ten narrow-issue cases. They will never rule on the core purpose of the Second Amendment and tell the lower courts that . . .

In fact, the Second Amendment means exactly what it says, and you must apply strict scrutiny in evaluating any challenge to a law on Second Amendment grounds. No more screwing around; the Second Amendment is the law, and you must uphold it. If you don’t like that, pass an amendment to repeal it.

Instead, by refusing to act at all, the Court has effectively repealed the Second Amendment itself. Second class? Try no right. Just privileges occasionally dispensed in some jurisdictions.

If an allegedly conservative-majority Court won’t do anything to uphold the Constitution, then Democrat plans to expand the Supreme Court and pack it with left-leaners to finalize their socialist agenda are a moot point. The current Court is already doing just fine by them on Second Amendment issues as they’ve done’ on a variety of their other top priorities. Why mess with success?

comments

  1. avatar Dennis says:

    So much for appointing “conservatives” to the bench, eh!?

    1. avatar enuf says:

      The Federalist Society has done well appointing Federal Judges these recent three and a half years, they’ve had pretty good luck. Just not lucky enough I guess.

      Some people say Trump did it all, but that’s just silly noise. Fake News really.

      1. avatar Dude says:

        So you think Hillary would have appointed those same judges? The Federalist Society doesn’t have the power to appoint judges.

    2. avatar Jakesixx says:

      A Democrat stabs the constitution in the chest and Republican stabs it in the back. No government agency can seem to accept that authority is limited. SCOTUS fails us again and again.

      1. avatar Cleophus says:

        I hope y’all remember that Southerners tried to tell you this shit in 1861, but you just couldn’t seem to grasp the fact that the federal government was never supposed to be the arbiter of it’s own power; that it is the sovereign State that has the final say. While you watch your cities burn and the defense, by your government, of your unalienable rights, don’t forget to thank ole’ “honest Abe” and his Yankee hoard for destroying the government of the Founders and giving you the farce of a government you have today.

        1. avatar MB says:

          Clophas:
          Wow! Didn’t expect this! A man who knows his history! “The Federal government was never supposed to be the arbiter of its own power.” 95% of the populace has never heard of this idea much less understand what it means.

          Deo Vindici. But probably not until we’ve gone to hell and back after my lifetime. What remains to be seen Is if patriots will respond like Jefferson said would be necessary else we lose it all.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Deo Vindici”

          That can get you banned from social media.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “I hope y’all remember that Southerners tried to tell you this shit in 1861, but you just couldn’t seem to grasp the fact that the federal government was never supposed to be the arbiter of it’s own power; that it is the sovereign State that has the final say. ”

          I wish people like you would stop dumping facts into the conversation. There are some facts we like, and some we don’t. When we don’t like facts, we champion the truth. So….don’t go disturbing the bassinet.

  2. avatar Stateisevil says:

    I wrote this article 25 years ago. When will we learn that other measures must be taken?

    1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      If we are to return to what the Constitution calls for it is inevitable.

  3. avatar TommyGNR says:

    We were counting on Roberts. That was obviously a error. This is not a conservative court. Only 4 of the 9 justices are motivated to preserve the US Constitution

    1. avatar Michael in AK says:

      I think that number is really 3 out of 9, but time will tell. Most “conservative” judges start sliding left once appointed.

      1. avatar 9x39 says:

        Absolutely what I posted a couple of days ago. Anyone that consider’s Kavanaugh solid on the 2nd, is in for a rude awakening.

  4. avatar I Haz A Question says:

    While I share in the author’s (Carl’s) frustration, this highlights the need to remain engaged in the fight. Trump vs. Biden for the Presidency is a no-brainer. Trump has been able to appoint two SCOTUS Justices so far, and 200+ federal (confirmed) judges, with many more nominated and awaiting confirmation. When RBG takes her dirt nap, that will make for another Justice. And Trump’s appointments to the Ninth Circuit alone have swung its political lean away from the Left and into Center, which is a yuuuuge improvement.

    True, this is not a guarantee of rulings & opinions we’d always agree with (thanks for nothing, Roberts), but imagine if Hillary or Biden were at the helm in the Oval Office.

    We must keep up the fight. As Churchill famously said, “Never give up, never give up, never, ever, give up.”

    You can be assured the Left won’t.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Hear hear!

      Is Trump perfect? Does he have a wonderful personality? Absolutely not. Is he the best available option for President of the United Sates to uphold our rights at this time? Yes, yes he is.

      Vote for Trump for none other than the fact that he is reliably appointing judges who actually uphold our rights, justice, and the United States Constitution.

      Presidents come and go. Judges on federal benches are there for a lifetime and quite often are the only thing standing between us and state/federal bureaucracies and the deep-state.

      1. avatar Peter says:

        Not just Trump but vote a straight Republican ticket and get rid of every damn Democrat in office, local, state and national.

      2. avatar Baldwin says:

        “Judges … are the only thing standing between us and state/federal bureaucracies and the deep-state.”

        Not this time. And not very many times at all.

    2. avatar Steve says:

      Um, A Trump appointed judge was one of the three that blocked the injunction against california’s ammo law…..

      1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

        Indeed, which is why I said “…this is not a guarantee of rulings & opinions we’d always agree with, […] but imagine if Hillary or Biden were at the helm in the Oval Office.”

  5. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    If an allegedly conservative-majority Court won’t do anything to uphold the Constitution …

    Who established that the United Stated Supreme Court has a conservative majority? I certainly do not see it that way: Chief Justice Roberts has clearly demonstrated that he is obviously not conservative.

    1. avatar Eric in Oregon says:

      “allegedly” was literally the third word you quoted there.

  6. avatar Paul Kerpash says:

    Gutless!

  7. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    The SCOTUS has been corrupt for quite awhile, a direct result of veering from the Constitution,just another branch of government used to placate the sheep.

  8. avatar GuyInWI says:

    All of the rights are optional unfortunately. Coronavirus response should of been eye opening to most at how little the powers that be care about your rights.

  9. avatar Josh says:

    Roberts was the single biggest mistake W. ever made and we’ll all pay for it for decades.

    1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      Roberts is exactly what Bush hoped for with his appointment.

      1. avatar ChoseDeath says:

        Damn right he was. Scum appointed by scum.

      2. avatar 9x39 says:

        Shhhh, you’re not supposed to let the secret out.

        Hate to inform the rest of you if you didn’t know, but the Bush family is largely as scummy as the Clinton’s. They just covered up their history better. Not infallibly though.

  10. avatar Alan says:

    Did members of the court, upon being appointed and confirmed, not take an oath to support, uphold and defend the constitution, or was that oath limited to the lowly soldier?

    1. avatar Old Barn says:

      When you believe that what you say is what the constitution says, i.e., that you are the constitution, you are really just taking an oath to yourself. And yes, that is what SCOTUS thinks, with the exception of a few, not nearly a majority.

  11. avatar Texican says:

    What do the Dems have on Roberts? It’s as if they are holding something over his head and blackmailing him.

  12. avatar Alan says:

    Rino Roberts strikes again.

  13. avatar Chiefton says:

    The SCOTUS has taken it upon themselves to make changes to the Bill of Rights. First was the 2nd amendment and then the 1st amendment by allowing the government to close churches. It is coming very close to the poeple taking the government back thmesleves.

  14. avatar Jimmy Beam says:

    So-called “conservatives” have been flaking out for decades. And not just on the courts, but in state legislatures, Congress, academia, K-12, and even the churches. They have given half-hearted defenses against every “liberal” assault on rights and decency over the last fifty years. I can’t tell you how many thousands of dollars I have given to various “conservative” political campaigns and organizations over the years, only to be disappointed. What a waste of money.

    Conservatives have become more like libertarians, toothless twits that care more about their bank accounts.

    1. avatar Jeff says:

      First it was Souter, then Kennedy, now Roberts. Funny that the liberals never back down for one moment.

      If Trump wins again (unlikely) and actually gets to seat another conservative, maybe they will finally respect the 2A. Or maybe there will just be another “swing vote” that magically appears.

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        Trump was supposed to lose badly. He won instead. Joe is not even half the candidate She was and there is a silent majority that doesn’t want Joe in there.

        Keep your chin up and turn off the news.

  15. avatar Justsomeguy says:

    My personal definition of a right is a freedom that a man will sacrifice his blood and treasure to keep. Regardless of what the SC says, I maintain the RKBA. We’ll see what it what it will cost me to keep it.

  16. avatar B. Zerker says:

    We have an opportunity here to get a few of these justices removed from the bench. Article III, Section 1, clearly dictates that: “The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior,…”. I’d say that “willfully” dodging “a known task” that is the “duty” of a Supreme Court Justice, cannot be classified as “good Behavior”. The Second Amendment is a simple, concisely worded command that orders (“shall not”) the government(s), federal and states’ (re: Article VI, Paragraph 2) not to ‘infringe’ upon “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms,…). What don’t some of these justices understand about this plain and ABSOLUTE language? I know Thomas and Alito understand. I think Gorsuch and Kavanaugh understand. Roberts and the rest do not perform their sworn singular duty of interpreting the Framers mandates absolutely, and therefore should be removed from the bench for that reason. A lifetime appointment to the court, which is a good thing, cannot be upheld if Justices commit treasonous acts or willfully disregard the mandates of the U.S. Constitution! We have the tool (Article III, Section 1), we should use it mercilessly against the enemies of the Constitution!

  17. avatar Ironhead says:

    All are equally worthless, gutless cowards.

  18. avatar Docduracoat says:

    The reason they have not taken a case is because the four conservatives do not trust justice Roberts.
    If he sides with the liberals on a major Supreme Court case, that will be a setback to the right to keep and bear arms for decades, perhaps generations.

    They are waiting for one of the elderly liberal justices, likely Ruth Ginsberg to die so that Trump can appoint a reliable conservative to the court.
    Then they will except some second amendment cases and force the lower courts to adhere to the rulings in the Heller case.

    1. avatar Jeff says:

      Waiting for Trump? He’s unlikely to win reelection. Even if he does, we might lose the Senate.

      Perhaps they are instead just waiting for Thomas to retire so that the 2A will just be a historical curiosity for future generations. The “conservative” justices won’t have to hear about it every day any more and they can go back to managing the decline of freedom in the US.

      1. avatar Pariah says:

        Keep on baiting A-HOLE, it’s not working!!

  19. avatar Samuel T says:

    The dems own Roberts, they have something on him. When he ruled on Obama care is when I figured this bastard is corrupt.

  20. avatar jram01 says:

    “Texican says:
    June 17, 2020 at 13:52
    What do the Dems have on Roberts? It’s as if they are holding something over his head and blackmailing him.”

    Let’s turn that around a little:
    What does Trump have on the Republican Senate? It’s as if he’s holding something over their heads and blackmailing them.”

    1. avatar Texican says:

      Trump has given them a backbone to do the things they already should have been doing. Dems have an evil party platform but follow it religiously. Repubs have a great party platform but only adhere to it when their feet are held to the fire. Its ludicrous to believe Trump has something on dozens of senators JRAM01.

  21. avatar Old Barn says:

    A little history lesson, before the 1930’s SCOTUS did not have certiorari review, which allows them to select which cases they will hear. Instead, they had to hear all appeals that were filed. But they were purportedly so overworked that they cut a deal with Congress to get cert review rather than mandatory appellate review. When questioned about how SCOTUS might abuse its power by selectively avoiding certain cases, etc. they swore, yes swore, that would not happen; they would always grant cert to resolve lower federal court conflicts. SCOTUS started ignoring that and picking and choosing and soon as Congress enacted the cert law. Should have removed folks then and gone back to the appellate review approach, rather than cert review approach. I like the removing approach, but that will cut both ways. Another solution would be to have Congress reenact the appeal law and remove cert power; jam them with work and make them decide them all. And do not increase the budget. But that also, would work both ways as liberals would just keep making it up. The judiciary of the founding no longer exists, at least not in sufficient numbers. And the legislature is incapable of solving the problems; they are owned. We have to rethink how to manage a politicized judiciary. If we can’t do that some way, which is doubtful, the alternative is going be ugly.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Not exactly correct. The Court distinguishes between an “appeal,” which is where the appellant has an absolute statutory or other right to be heard by a higher court if the appellant asks, and a “petition for a writ of certiorari,” which is entirely permissive since the petitioner has no right to be heard by SCOTUS.

      Since 1925, most cases cannot be appealed to SCOTUS as a matter of right. A litigant must petition for cert, and SCOTUS has no obligation to grant cert.

  22. avatar Sam I Am says:

    Having no patience with a politically charged SC, I do understand the sensibility of not bringing to the bench any case that would have permanent impact if wrongly decided. Just hate that the SC refused to decide, but also hate the idea of losing to the anti-American faction of feelz mongers.

    1. avatar 9x39 says:

      Which is increasingly likely, given the monopolization of the far left of the educational indoctinational system.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Which is increasingly likely, given the monopolization of the far left of the educational indoctinational system.”

        Indeed.

        What was/is it that caused conservatives/constitutionalists/Republicans to abandon every major arena of society, except maybe the law, to the anti-Americans?

        1. avatar 9x39 says:

          That, amigo, I’ve never been able to figure out. Maybe I was to young at the time to see, or perhaps they never existed at all. Life is but a dream, and all of that rot. Don’t get me wrong, I’m quite pleased the neocon’s are done for, but the core values seemingly have been gone for longer than I’ve been alive. Neocon’s gave it lip service, but really didn’t respect the bottom line, except with a sly wink on the side.

          Old enough to remember Carter, but not enough of the early parts. Reagan, I remember vividly. Should date stamp me pretty well, I think. 😉

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Maybe I was to young at the time to see, or perhaps they never existed at all.”

          I predate you, and while observing the drift, cannot understand why the left was allowed to metastasize. I know that my generation had way too many who were allowed to run wild while the parents stood helplessly by and watched. What is puzzling is that the older adults just retreated, rather than demand a role in the molding of the society. By time I hit college, leftism was “in” among the faculty. The students reveled in being adults with no responsibilities.

          If you are familiar with the classic movie, “High Noon”, it is an interesting treatise on what the future would bring. At the time of release, the movie was generally panned as being un-American. The viewing public seemed to see the movie as promoting the idea that, at the core, Americans were full-belly, soft squishes, preferring peace and safety to standing up for what is/was right. If you are not familiar with the movie, have a look, and tell me it isn’t a prophecy that has been fulfilled.

        3. avatar 9x39 says:

          Quite familiar with High Noon, I am. No doubt the prophesy was self fulfilling. My personal perspective, and the influx of far leftist idealism was already making inroads in the scholastic sectors no one ever thought of at the time. You see, I lived in a place where the only viable educational path for any chance of success, was in private schools. I can state, unequivocally, even within my early years, I recognize the patterns there today. More galling in retrospect perhaps, is those institutions were Southern Baptist & Roman Catholic run facilities.

          Comparatively, when my parents separated for a couple years, I attended a public high school. Being completely forthright, I must admit that I saw no substantive differences, with respect to the question at hand. The same remained true when they got back together, and I finished up my HS education under the tutelage of another Southern Baptist private school, though they claimed no affiliation directly. Though I clearly saw the withdrawal you speak of throughout all of my scholastic endeavors, I know not what the root cause was. My own generation, assuming you’re not Gen X, largely did exactly the same. Never standing up to claim their place in history, even now.

          As the above may or may not indicate, after I left the strict regimen of the service, & continued my education, I to played the wild child for a decade. I got my ducks back in a row by my early 30’s, then settled into family life not so very long after. That valuation of family is why I concern myself so much with the functionality bereft of ideals and morality existence. The critically broken version of what is laughing referred to as “modern” society. This is no world I want to leave to my children, not this way.

          _______________________________________________

          “promoting the idea that, at the core, Americans were full-belly, soft squishes, preferring peace and safety to standing up for what is/was right”

          _______________________________________________

          As it happens, I agree wholeheartedly with that assessment. Under the laser sharp lens of unfiltered history, that’s been so for a very, very long time. Further, I’d level that charge against most of humanity on the whole. Not any particular generation, nor country, faith, or race. Modern humanity on the other hand, has lost it’s driving motivations, supplanted by greed & indolence. A banal existence worthy of nothing.

          They were always factors throughout the eon’s to be sure, but never in history has humanity been so deeply infected by it. Of course, never in human history have the peoples of the world had it so collectively easy either. That, I suspect is a gigantic factor, being no real challenge to rise to.

          Except that there is, right over our heads. The populating of the incomprehensibly vast reaches of space. Something that will bring humanity challenges the likes of which we have never faced before. That in itself, is a huge topic, that encompasses much. And best saved for another day.

        4. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “That, I suspect is a gigantic factor, being no real challenge to rise to. ”

          It was written long ago, “Where there is no vision, the people perish; rather, cast off restraint, become ungovernable, cannot be reined in.” The destruction of the founders’ vision of nation leaves all purpose derelict. We have arrived at a child’s view of freedom: the ability to do whatever, without personal consequence. (To boringly repeat myself: we are in the fourth generation of children raising children to remain children)

  23. avatar Jim Warren says:

    Some people learn the easy way, some people have to learn the hard way. Is there any wonder why there is no respect for the rule of law anymore?

  24. avatar GS650G says:

    The judges are products of their environment. They have little to no experience in areas where self defense is an issue. Roberts went along with Scalia on Heller and that was the end of it. That Heller is ignored and twisted to screw people isn’t his concern. Don’t look for him to care.

  25. avatar Marcus Aurelius Tarkus says:

    Alito, Gorsuch, Thomas and Kavanaugh all knew they could not count on Roberts to swing in favor of 2A when crunch time came. Hence, the strategic cert-denial assents. Roberts=Kennedy. A timely liberal SCOTUS vacancy and a successful and reliably pro 2A replacement would be little short of miraculous now. We’re all in this…separately. The future is lopsidedly against us. What little rhetorical comfort we have once came from the mouth of…Mao.

  26. avatar DrZ says:

    I realize that we are all frustrated with Roberts caving once again, but nothing I’ve heard addresses the questions I’d like answered. Now that these cases have been denied certorari, what is the next step?
    Can they be brought up again next term? or do we need to wait years for a new set of challenges work their way thru the appellate system? I doubt that in NJwe’ll ever get another crack at getting rid of “justifiable need”

  27. avatar kap says:

    upholding the Constitution must of been the part he missed while chasing Anita Hill! Holder and himself are cut from the same cloth both are Racist Serving their puppet Masters {Democrat Party}, maybe getting a little side action from Bloomberg or Soros!

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