Dems Lose Their Minds, DOJ Makes Concerning Statement on SCOTUS Gun Rights Decision – Opinion

This was a significant victory for gun rights. The Court decided that “the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home” and that the New York law requiring a “proper cause” to obtain a concealed carry license was unconstitutional.

Joe Cunningham, my colleague reported on the bizarre reactions of some members of the peanut gallery. This included Keith Olbermann (ex-acting U.S. Attorney). Former U.S. attorney Preet Bhaara and Solicitor General Neal Katyal. Bharara said, “SCOTUS read neither the room nor the Constitution correctly.” Funny, and perhaps telling that he doesn’t understand that the Court isn’t supposed to be ‘reading the room’ but deciding purely on the Constitution no matter what the ‘room’ says.

However, the Democrats’ reaction to the election was delusional as well as concerning.

NY Gov. Kathy Hochul didn’t take the decision well. Indeed, she said they would fight for even more restrictions, despite the Supreme Court’s decision. Hochul said that if the Court wanted to consider the original meaning of the Constitution, she was willing to go back to “muskets.” She revealed not only how extreme she is, but how ignorant she is of the law.

Okay, she must give up her phone, microphone and Botox. It’s possible she could be in serious trouble. This is a false narrative that they push, as though the Founders couldn’t anticipate harmful weapons when, indeed, they had cannons and people could have those, despite Joe Biden’s lies to the contrary.

Hochul goes on to falsely make a claim about restrictions on speech that Joe Biden often makes, “You can’t yell fire in a crowded theater.”

“Shocking. It is shocking to learn that reasonable restrictions have been taken from us. You can restrict speech. You can’t yell fire in a crowded theater, but somehow there’s no restrictions allowed on the Second Amendment?”

Despite the fact that Democrats try to use this restriction to justify their anti-constitutional tendencies, there’s no such restriction. As we’ve previously explained, that expression stems from dictum (meaning not binding as a legal precedent) in a case that was later overturned. So, it never had the force of law; it’s just something that people who want to grab your rights ignorantly say. It’s disturbing that she either doesn’t know that or that she doesn’t care about the truth–when she has a legal degree and should know.

Then there was Joe Biden’s reaction. In his response, Joe Biden does not say that he agrees with the decision, even though he doesn’t like it. This seems like he has thrown out that standard. Indeed, it sounds like he’s calling for people to come out and protest this decision.

Biden said, “I am deeply disappointed by the Supreme Court’s ruling. … I call on Americans across the country to make their voices heard on #GunSafety. Lives are on the line.”

The DOJ also issued a concerning statement, again not saying that they would uphold the decision but saying they “disagree.”

It isn’t up to the DOJ to disagree — it’s supposed to be an objective, non-political entity enforcing the law. They’re not supposed to be making political comment. They are making a comment on it. And are they saying they won’t enforce the law or act in accordance with the decision?

Jennifer Van Laar mentions in her tweet the proposal wending its way through the Senate now that envisions the states imposing red flag laws, that the DOJ isn’t interested in protecting your rights and they show it by this statement. Will the Senate red flag laws it envisions surviving this decision? Or will they be swept aside by the DOJ preemptively?

This is especially concerning given the Democratic responses to the ongoing abortion case. It is time to throw out all norms. Are they going to accept these decisions? Will they enforce the decisions?

Follow Us