Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Friday, June 21, 2024

The Supreme Court has ruled that when an individual has been found by a court to pose a credible threat to the physical safety of another, that individual may be temporarily disarmed consistent with the Second Amendment. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion, and Justice Clarence Thomas dissented. "Our tradition of firearm regulation allows the Government to disarm individuals who present a credible threat to the physical safety of others," he wrote.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said that Second Amendment rights had limits.

"When a restraining order contains a finding that an individual poses a credible threat to the physical safety of an intimate partner, that individual may - consistent with the Second Amendment - be banned from possessing firearms while the order is in effect," he wrote. "Since the founding, our nation's firearm laws have included provisions preventing individuals who threaten physical harm to others from misusing firearms."

www.nytimes.com

Well, Clarence finds himself out on the very thin branch of his originalism tree that Roberts just cut out from under him. There's another thread highlighting ACB's pointed break with Thomas on how he uses this "test" to decide the constitutionality of contemporary issues - many that have no direct analogue in history.

Very interesting.

#1 | Posted by tonyroma at 2024-06-21 11:03 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

The Supreme Court is just kind of making it up as it goes along now on gun laws.

The Bruen decision was one of the dumbest, most impossible to use decisions in the history of the Court. No one has any clue what it means as the 5th Circuit demonstrated.

#2 | Posted by Sycophant at 2024-06-21 11:29 AM | Reply

#2 | Posted by Sycophant

Kind of? They have worked to change the meaning of the 2nd amendment as interpreted for nearly 200 years to satisfy the right wing base.

#3 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2024-06-21 02:24 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

.... "Our tradition of firearm regulation allows the Government to disarm individuals who present a credible threat to the physical safety of others," ...

Isn't this the type of ruling that the "it's not the gun, it's the person" pro-2nd-Amendment people would want?


#4 | Posted by LampLighter at 2024-06-21 02:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Today's mass shooting was brought to you by the NRA/GQP/SCOTUS.

www.cbsnews.com

#5 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2024-06-21 05:35 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

"It's not about the guns it's about the luxury cruises on the Mega-Yacht!"
Clarence Thomas

#6 | Posted by danni at 2024-06-21 06:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 6

Poor Uncle Tom

#7 | Posted by hamburglar at 2024-06-21 11:35 PM | Reply

Clearance Thomas' dissenting opinion was a ------- joke, basically arguing that originalism means domestic violence didnt exist in the 1800s legally so it cant effect the 2nd amendment.

what a tool. bu that logic phones didnt exist in the 1800s so soneone can use it to call in a bomb threat and be protected by the first amendment. I cant believe this clown passed the bar.

#8 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2024-06-22 12:01 AM | Reply

@#8 ... Clearance Thomas' dissenting opinion was a fu!king joke ...

It makes one wonder who paid for him to proffer that opinion?

#9 | Posted by LampLighter at 2024-06-22 12:13 AM | Reply

I dunno, Roberts' opinion was somehow even dumber, arguing that originalism had to evolve.

making it not originalism ...

its so obvious these guys start with a fixed opinion and work their way backwards ftom it. Theyre as transparent about their bias as Scalia was.

SCOTUS is trash right now.

#10 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2024-06-22 12:17 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

A woman from handmaids tale, an insurrectionist, a pedantic creep that stole merrick garlands job, an alcoholic rapist, an inept leader obsessed with his legacy, and an affirmative action hire on the take all walk into the supreme court.

jokes on us.

#11 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2024-06-22 12:20 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

@#10 ... I dunno, Roberts' opinion was somehow even dumber, arguing that originalism had to evolve.

making it not originalism ...

Yeah, you can see the stretch marks in the opinion.

... SCOTUS is trash right now. ...

You do not know how much I want to disagree with that assertion. But I cannot disagree.

My view is that the Roberts Supreme Court will go down in history as, at best, one of the most tainted of the Courts.

I doubt if that is the legacy that Chief Justice of the US Roberts was hoping for, but that seems to be the legacy that fmr Pres Trump has handed to him.



#12 | Posted by LampLighter at 2024-06-22 12:31 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Today's mass shooting was brought to you by the NRA/GQP/SCOTUS.

www.cbsnews.com

#5 | Posted by reinheitsgebot

the murder and rape of Rachel Morin......and the murder and rape of the TWELVE YEAR OLD GIRL

all by illegals....brought to those families by BIDEN.....AND YOU !!!... and anyone who supports

his dissolved border.

#13 | Posted by shrimptacodan at 2024-06-22 09:25 AM | Reply

"the murder and rape of Rachel Morin"

One of Trump's 25 out of court settlements?

#14 | Posted by snoofy at 2024-06-22 09:28 AM | Reply

reinheitsgebot

I'm gonna say you don't like reading anything using your own logic.

I won't be disappointed, I'm sure.

#15 | Posted by shrimptacodan at 2024-06-22 09:31 AM | Reply

the murder and rape of Rachel Morin"

One of Trump's 25 out of court settlements?

#14 | Posted by snoofy

I had heard that you were an illiterate POS.

I wasn't aware that the people who told me that were underestimating just how much.

#16 | Posted by shrimptacodan at 2024-06-22 09:33 AM | Reply

"But you have heard of me!"

#17 | Posted by snoofy at 2024-06-22 09:36 AM | Reply

If you were able to do math, you would understand that illegal immigrants commit less crime than natural born citizens.

But you're not even able to do basic emotions.

You're a great example of what happens when mommy and daddy don't love you enough.

#18 | Posted by snoofy at 2024-06-22 09:40 AM | Reply

been reading around the bloga-s-phere and there is the usual amount of biased, godamn bigots

ruminating throughout the leftist-dogma klan koven of klunts.

I and vast majority of family, friends and acquaintances agree with this ruling.

and in fact believe that a man who beats up a woman shouldn't be able to see through a bloody,

disfigured pulp of a face to aim a weapon.

--but don't let reality and facts ruin a good session of virtue signaling / fake moral outrage BS.

so the difference between us is highlighted.

I think a man who beats up a woman should suffer consequences..

when a biden "visitor" comes back after being deported because of biden's dissolved border and rapes and kills children ???

you don't give a damn / "F" / "S"....and I know why you doint....

because the victims are almost exclusively white.....and you're racist garbage who value the brain dead vegetable more than other

human life.

kilroy was here.

eat it.

#19 | Posted by shrimptacodan at 2024-06-22 09:43 AM | Reply

If you were able to do math, you would understand that illegal immigrants commit less crime than natural born citizens.

#18 | Posted by snoofy

that is a lie.

proven with multiple examples of leftist lying about the stats.

--crime stats always go down when DA's like bragg drop charges / rioters who burn buildings are released

thanks to funds created by the VPOTUS and democrat DA's around the country are being called out

for releasing criminals..

the two who murdered the little girl in Houston....one was deported and returned in March...the other in May..

the bastard in NY ....who should have had his throat ---- with his own knife ....was deported TREE TIMES

please...read a godam book sometime.

#20 | Posted by shrimptacodan at 2024-06-22 09:49 AM | Reply

"that is a lie."

Prove it.

#21 | Posted by snoofy at 2024-06-22 09:52 AM | Reply

Clearance Thomas' dissenting opinion was a ------- joke

Thomas applied Bruen correctly. The problem is that the Bruen standard is an unworkable travesty.

#22 | Posted by JOE at 2024-06-22 10:10 AM | Reply

Question for the Originalists:

Should the standard in Bruen apply to all the Amendments, or just the Second?

#23 | Posted by snoofy at 2024-06-22 10:19 AM | Reply

It depends. Will it help republicans?

#24 | Posted by truthhurts at 2024-06-22 10:37 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It would definitely help overturn gay marriage. As Clarence Thomas has already suggested they should.

I'm sure Republicans think overturning gay marriage would be good for Republicans.

Then again I'm sure Republicans though overturning Roe would be good for Republicans.

#25 | Posted by snoofy at 2024-06-22 10:43 AM | Reply

Roberts Tries To Put The Bruen Toothpaste Back In the Tube

Thomas' dissent, in which he argues that there is no historical analogue to a law taking firearms from a domestic abuser under a protective order, is (horrifyingly) probably closer to the truth of what Bruen established. Roberts stretches the need for a historical predecessor into generalities, finding laws from the founding that took a bond as punishment if someone committed violence, or that removed weapons from those who'd menaced others. It's clear that the Court's sanctified history and traditions test is more flexible than it appears; when it comes to a drug dealing respondent who has fired his gun at his ex-girlfriend, at cars in traffic, in a fast food restaurant, and kept his weapons in his home nearby a copy of the restraining order forbidding him to have them, our history becomes much more forward-looking.

To be clear: Thank God. Anyone with half a brain already knows that this Court is almost entirely results-oriented, and if the conservatives need to pretend that the founders cared about wife-beating to stop domestic abusers from so easily murdering their victims, so be it.

But it also amplifies the mortification all of the right-wing justices should feel for signing onto Bruen in the first place, in which Thomas made abundantly clear that virtually all gun regulations were now at existential risk.

I'm glad the conservatives were shamed into this ruling; it'll mean fewer dead women. But it's yet more proof that these justices are fundamentally political actors, and that their supposedly ironclad interpretive tests are worth no more than the paper they're written on.

- Kate Riga

#26 | Posted by tonyroma at 2024-06-22 12:16 PM | Reply

#2

Yeah, Bruen was the right decision, but based on completely idiotic reasoning. "Historical" laws have NOTHING to do with whether a current law is actually constitutional, there have been an insane number of blatantly unconstitutional laws in the history of the US.

If you go by what the historical intent of the 2A was, every adult citizen would be required to own at a minimum a full auto M4 carbine and 210 rounds of 5.56 loaded in magazines. I don't think anybody wants to go there in 2024.

Historically, 'domestic violence' didn't exist. There was no such thing as spousal rape, and wife beating was a longstanding tradition. It's good that the court at least recognized "historical basis" was a stupid way to decide this case.

#27 | Posted by DarkVader at 2024-06-22 12:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Historically, 'domestic violence' didn't exist.

Neither did "bump stocks" or automatic weapons.

#28 | Posted by donnerboy at 2024-06-22 12:57 PM | Reply

"that is a lie".

No it's not.

Get your head out of Trumpy's arse and you might finally be able to see the truth.

Comparing crime rates between undocumented immigrants, legal immigrants, and native-born US citizens in Texas

Relative to undocumented immigrants, US-born citizens are over 2 times more likely to be arrested for violent crimes, 2.5 times more likely to be arrested for drug crimes, and over 4 times more likely to be arrested for property crimes. -Texas Department of Public Safety

#29 | Posted by donnerboy at 2024-06-22 01:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2024 World Readable

Drudge Retort