The U.S. Supreme Court has decided to review matters pertaining to the Second Amendment, specifically the challenges against the Biden administration’s prohibition on “bump stocks” and New York State’s exclusion of the National Rifle Association.
According to a report by Fox News on Friday, the bump stock issue pertains to the use of a firearm modification that is affixed to specific rifles, while the NRA lawsuit concerns a legal dispute centered upon the protection of free speech rights by the aforementioned organization.
According to the report, “The high court will hear arguments in the case National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo, which questions whether a government regulator threatening regulated entities with adverse regulatory actions if they do business with a controversial speaker, allegedly because of the government’s own hostility to the speaker’s viewpoint, violates the First Amendment.”
According to Fox, “The former Superintendent of the New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS), Maria T. Vullo, at the behest of former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, allegedly wielded DFS’s regulatory power to financially blacklist the NRA – coercing banks and insurers to cut ties with the association, in an effort, the group says, to suppress its speech.”
Furthermore, the lawsuit filed by the NRA said that Vullo engaged in clandestine intimidation tactics towards regulated companies, wherein she offered leniency for unrelated infractions in exchange for their agreement to boycott the gun rights organization.
NRA CEO & EVP Wayne LaPierre remarked that “This is a historic step forward for the NRA, its millions of members, and all who believe in the freedom of speech. The NRA’s fight continues – this time in the highest court in the land. At a time when free speech is under attack as never before, we believe the Supreme Court will send a message to government officials that they cannot use intimidation tactics to silence those with whom they disagree.”
The second case, Garland v. Cargill, raises the issue before the Supreme Court of whether the utilization of a bump stock device effectively alters specific firearms into a “machine gun” as delineated by federal legislation, given its purpose of converting rifles into weapons capable of “automatically more than one shot… by a single function of the trigger.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) implemented a ban on bump stocks during the Trump administration subsequent to a mass shooting incident in Las Vegas in 2017, which resulted in the loss of 60 lives and caused injuries to 500 individuals.
According to Fox News, it was stated that…
Semi-automatic rifles with bump stocks could fire hundreds of rounds per minute, according to experts.
They were originally created to make it easier for people with disabilities to fire a gun. The device essentially replaces the gun’s stock and pistol grip and causes the weapon to buck back and forth, repeatedly “bumping” the trigger against the shooter’s finger.
Michael Cargill, owner of Central Texas Gun Works, sued the government after he was forced to surrender several bump stocks under the ATF’s rule.
Cargill argued in his petition that the Supreme Court should take up the case because the question presented “has sharply divided the federal courts of appeals.”
Based on the report, it is evident that three federal appeals courts concur with the pre-2018 restriction imposed by the ATF, asserting that the gadgets in question do not possess the capability to transform rifles into machine guns. Conversely, two additional appeals courts align themselves with the ban enforced by the agency.
According to Fox News, the legal representation for Cargill is being provided by the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA). According to Mark Chenoweth, the president and general counsel of NCLA, “this is not a case about gun rights. It is a case about administrative power.” This case pertains to the exercise of administrative authority.
“Congress never gave ATF the power to rewrite federal criminal statutes pertaining to machine guns—nor could it. Writing federal criminal laws is the sole preserve of Congress, and the Trump and Biden administrations committed grievous constitutional error by trying to ban bump stocks without involving Congress. We are confident the U.S. Supreme Court will right this wrong for Michael Cargill and all Americans,” he expressed with assurance.
According to Fox News, it has been reported that oral arguments are scheduled to take place in the upcoming year, with rulings anticipated to be delivered in June.
In June of this year, California’s Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, suggested a 28th amendment to the Constitution, which he claims would reduce gun violence in the country.
Instead of discussing the scourge of mental illness or the lack of basic human empathy among past and potential shooters, it concentrates on taking away Americans’ right to bear arms.
The new amendment, that Newsom advocated by way of both Twitter and a press release, would outlaw so-called “assault weapons” nationally, impose waiting periods for buyers, and implement background checks for everyone, he said.
Source: Fox News
The post Supreme Court Just Brutally Humiliates Joe Biden In Front of Everyone appeared first on The Republic Brief.
About Author
