Supreme Court Considers "Assault Weapon" Ban Case

Supreme Court Considers "Assault Weapon" Ban Case

Copper Jacket TV

7 дней назад

44,766 Просмотров

Ссылки и html тэги не поддерживаются


Комментарии:

@jongruen7854
@jongruen7854 - 18.03.2025 12:28

The firearms and magazine bans need a full court decision. Without all the dictum included. That the lower courts and legislators just love to use to write around the prevalent decisions. The lower or inferior courts have ignored. The decisions in Heller, Caetano, and Bruen so far with very sketchy decisions. An opinion written to the lower courts would be a miscarriage of justice. The lower courts would just ignore that as well. This isn't a normal case. As it is a case of American citizens' rights have been denied. And stop the damn delays of justice with the damn GVRs.

Ответить
@ahmadcampbell2626
@ahmadcampbell2626 - 18.03.2025 12:44

👌🏿👍🏿🤙🏿✌🏿

Ответить
@genemcdonald4049
@genemcdonald4049 - 18.03.2025 12:46

I agree, the curiam route, sending back to the lower courts telling that they have it worng will just allow those lower courts to stall for months, if not years. SCOTUS needs to accept and definitively decide these cases

Ответить
@Minuteman4Jesus
@Minuteman4Jesus - 18.03.2025 13:42

The lower courts - and the judges running them - need to be held in contempt & arrested.

Ответить
@jansobieski7470
@jansobieski7470 - 18.03.2025 14:20

Evidently you don't know how cases to the supremes move to and thru their systems... is comprised of legal maneuvering and too often politics... 😮

Ответить
@CHenry1951
@CHenry1951 - 18.03.2025 14:44

I hope your correct, but I'm not holding my breath............................ SCOTUS has lost it's bearing !!

Ответить
@cynic13
@cynic13 - 18.03.2025 14:58

This would be a great time for someone on their staff to leak what's going on

Ответить
@stevethomson552
@stevethomson552 - 18.03.2025 15:07

SCOTUS has already upheld the concept of firearms bans when they affirmed that background checks are constitutional.

Ответить
@greyport
@greyport - 18.03.2025 15:08

i dont think they will. since congress and the president are aligned somewhat they are wanting congress to update the law. multiple times they have said they do not create laws and that congress needs to fix or update current laws to not be so ambiguous. so stall until the other parts of the government do their job

Ответить
@davidrisselada6199
@davidrisselada6199 - 18.03.2025 15:29

Does someone pay you to push this idea of what the court may do? Stop speculating.

Ответить
@TheTubejunky
@TheTubejunky - 18.03.2025 15:49

slow boiled frog... it's in progress as usual... Won't be long the globalists will hold all the power and the peasants wont have a fighting chance....

Ответить
@GrayWolf2A
@GrayWolf2A - 18.03.2025 15:57

I feel that we, The Law Abiding Gun Owners, have been and are still being duped with
lies that President Trump and Pam Bondi are going to help us with our Second
Amendment Rights at all. I'm Starting to believe we were lied to in order to get the
votes of the Millions and Millions of Lawful Gun owners that helped win the
election for President Trump on the Promise that he was going to stop the infringements
on our Second Amendment Rights. I live in New Jersey where you have to pay Hundreds
of dollars to exercise your Second Amendment Right to get a TWO year permit to carry.
I paid a total of $776.00 in order to exercise my Second Amendment Right. I paid $67.00
for a Florida Non-resident FIVE year permit. I'm currently seeking to get a Pennsylvania
Carry Permit that only cost $26.00 for FIVE years. If President Trump's Second Amendment
Executive Order goes nowhere, then I am not going to exercise my right to vote on false promises
ever again. I'm loosing faith fast.

Ответить
@dagofoo
@dagofoo - 18.03.2025 16:04

Assault weapons are already banned, is not a weapon used for assault being used illegally? You’d think COMMON sense is common… I guess not.

Ответить
@oceanrunnerx8655
@oceanrunnerx8655 - 18.03.2025 16:06

If they don't want to do their job they should be fired!

Ответить
@castleman117
@castleman117 - 18.03.2025 16:51

I think they are waiting until the Illinois case makes it to the supreme Court so they can knock them all down at the same

Ответить
@FollowingGhost
@FollowingGhost - 18.03.2025 17:47

Around and around and nothing happens. The 2A is not going to be safe anytime soon.

Ответить
@johnnywilson7799
@johnnywilson7799 - 18.03.2025 17:52

I think the Supreme Court has become politically compromised

Ответить
@rickguerrero6752
@rickguerrero6752 - 18.03.2025 17:54

To me it's starting to look like no matter who is in the white house or supreme Court it's still us against them I voted for Trump and so far don't seem to matter what parties in power seems like they just want to disarm us no matter who's in the White House Hope I'm wrong I really do

Ответить
@johnnywilson7799
@johnnywilson7799 - 18.03.2025 17:58

Supreme Court has been politically compromised

Ответить
@salalbanese5537
@salalbanese5537 - 18.03.2025 18:08

Assault weapons are already banned, they are fully automatic weapons, people need to stop calling semi-automatic weapons Assault Weapons, They do not use them in wars except the the mind of anti gunners.

Ответить
@MGAC1701
@MGAC1701 - 18.03.2025 18:28

I have zero faith the Supreme Court will rule on the side of the Constitutiona and the 2nd Amendment.

Ответить
@GmanGSW
@GmanGSW - 18.03.2025 18:43

SCOTUS should take these 2 or 3 cases (Esp. regarding: Firearm Bans, Mag Mans and Permit to purchase schemes). We are seeing the tyranny of Leftist states to deprive people of their 2A Rights, toppling state governments, destroying Rights and making their Own Rules. This has to STOP! SCOTUS could put out an initial Per Curiam and then take the cases, yes, but we need SCOTUS to take the Cases.

Ответить
@toddhenson5570
@toddhenson5570 - 18.03.2025 19:07

"CONSIDER?"

Ответить
@dan8402
@dan8402 - 18.03.2025 19:10

They need to take it up, and hand it to Thomas. It could be his crowning achievement.

Ответить
@professional_larper
@professional_larper - 18.03.2025 20:13

Duude. They are gonna reschedule it again . We all know it dude. We're gonna hear you say it when it happens

Ответить
@andyforrest7548
@andyforrest7548 - 18.03.2025 20:18

Any ban is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Ответить
@andyforrest7548
@andyforrest7548 - 18.03.2025 20:18

Remove the NFA. As it in itself is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Ответить
@watermann8200
@watermann8200 - 18.03.2025 21:06

Taking this long for the mother of all bans, I can't imagine how long it will take for the dozens of other laws that also infringe.

Ответить
@stripmin41
@stripmin41 - 18.03.2025 21:45

I believe Ocean state started in 2022.

Ответить
@Dongbong-z4g
@Dongbong-z4g - 18.03.2025 21:50

No they are NOT!!!

Ответить
@TheCharleseye
@TheCharleseye - 18.03.2025 22:01

Wake me when they stop "considering" and start hearing these cases.

Ответить
@Mk1SpitfireGuy
@Mk1SpitfireGuy - 18.03.2025 22:05

We need to be careful with that "for self-defense" bit. It's, "for ALL LAWFUL PURPOSES, such as self-defense." The antis are trying very hard to limit thescopeofthis to self-defense only.

Ответить
@jeeves2009
@jeeves2009 - 18.03.2025 22:32

The Dobbs v. Jackson case that overturned Roe v. Wade was conferenced 22 times and rescheduled 9 times. Just because we haven’t gotten the result we want YET doesn’t mean we won’t.

Ответить
@logandive8976
@logandive8976 - 18.03.2025 23:14

Look the DOJ has been able to strip us of our Rights with stroke of a pen. This act is done quickly and without notice. Restoring them should be just as quick. With a stroke of a pen our Rights should be and can be restore to us just as quickly as they were taken away. It not hard, so why the delays, why is the process for restoring our Rights so slow? Its not that hard, but wait there might be an agenda that has not come to light. If this administration was so 2nd Amendment friendly, then our Rights to Bear Arms should have been the first thing to be restored back to the People. Infringing on our 2nd Amendment Rights is infringing on your Civil Rights. Infringement is a violation of the United States Constitution. The 2nd Amendment states "Should not Be Infringe" So this Right should be restored back to the People quickly without hesitation.

Ответить
@mikeyis009
@mikeyis009 - 18.03.2025 23:25

Rescheduled. The end of

Ответить
@bobhorsewood5689
@bobhorsewood5689 - 19.03.2025 01:09

When our forefathers couldn't get justice. They took justice.

Ответить
@mikebid8887
@mikebid8887 - 19.03.2025 02:47

California at it again AB 1187

Ответить
@rickluttrell5529
@rickluttrell5529 - 19.03.2025 03:28

Snore💤. 🥾🏈➰⤵️ 🗑️

Ответить
@ValkerieSilk
@ValkerieSilk - 19.03.2025 08:03

The AR-15 and standard capacity magazines are legal in all 50 states, as established by the Heller and Bruin decisions, which classify them as common-use arms. However, some liberal factions continue to reject this and may keep these cases in legal limbo indefinitely, as we've seen in California for over 20 years. The Trump administration should take a firm stand by issuing a strong executive order and adopting a hardline approach against states that infringe upon constitutional rights. This should include penalties such as the loss of federal funding, fines for constitutional violations, criminal charges against those who violate the Constitution, and providing immunity to law-abiding citizens exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

Ответить
@TruckingShooter
@TruckingShooter - 19.03.2025 12:23

To bad the Supreme court is compromised.

Ответить
@loudcamaro79.
@loudcamaro79. - 19.03.2025 16:32

What no one is telling y'all is the supreme court is crowded with other cases with deportations and other executive orders that have been attacked by smaller courts around the country

Ответить
@leobramel5345
@leobramel5345 - 19.03.2025 16:41

I believe we are losing to the communist in america.

Ответить
@shaunelijah455
@shaunelijah455 - 19.03.2025 18:54

Look, firstly the ONLY true "assault" rifles are fully automatics used by the military. What the left has trained the public to believe are "assault" rifles are in reality simply "semi-automatic" rifles. Nothing more

Ответить
@chlebowg
@chlebowg - 19.03.2025 19:28

IF SCOTUS does that, they're just kicking the can down the road again, denying rights again

Ответить
@douglash9364
@douglash9364 - 19.03.2025 21:28

If all goes well the not very wise latina and possibly one or two others will be replaced by Trump with the most radical people that can be found. Nothing to lose. I see Thomas wrapping up under Trump and giving him the seat unlike the nasty RBG did. Really need to see someone as radical as the left appoints on the right. We need an anchor for decades to come. No more screwing around at the USSC. Need a hard core slap down around the 2nd A. It's NOT a lesser right. Never has been never will be.

Ответить
@bobsmith-ji2uh
@bobsmith-ji2uh - 19.03.2025 22:05

They’re not going to take this case.

Ответить
@bsam0923
@bsam0923 - 19.03.2025 22:11

Have you considered that SCOTUS isn’t at all thrilled with the opinion Justice Thomas came up with? The concurring opinions seemed to suggest that might be the case. Think about what the Bruen says. It’s basically a sovereign citizen’s declaration that nothing beyond 18xx matters. As thrilled as folks may be to read that, it’s fairly nonsensical and it’s hard to see the courts put any real gusto behind it.

Ответить
@pwiley101
@pwiley101 - 19.03.2025 23:22

It's not getting ridiculous. It's been ridiculous from the onset! These are clear infringements on our 2A rights!!!

Ответить
@DrJogger
@DrJogger - 20.03.2025 14:15

When are we going to curb the court of patriot opinion

Ответить