SCOTUS rejects Missouri 2A protection law

[GeauxLSU]

Sounds like Missouri's not giving up. Kudos to them. And I don't know that we'll live to see another Clarance Thomas, but I sure hope so.
Justice Clarence Thomas on Friday indicated that he would have reinstated the Missouri law.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/us-supreme-court-keeps-missouri-law-hold-targets-federal-gun-restrictions

 

[Russ-T]

SCOTUS usually sides with the federal government while these cases move through the process. It doesn’t necessarily mean that they agree with the feds. But, we’ll see.

 

[Torn]

SCOTUS usually sides with the federal government while these cases move through the process.

And there in lies the problem.

 

[spencer60]

This was a stupid law that was pure political grandstanding. It's actually good they got schooled in SCOTUS so other states won't imitate their idiocy.

They could have done what many other states did and say that no local resources could be used to assist in certain federal activities, and that would have been fine.

Instead they tried to nullify any federal law which 'they' thought was 'unconstitutional'. Who the 'they' was who was determining all this wasn't specified. SCOTUS? Legislature? Bob at the local gun shop?

And trying to nullify federal law itself violates the constitution. The Founders clearly stated that federal laws supersede state law in the same was state law supersedes local ordinances.

If some liberal locality in Mizzou tried to ban 'assault weapons', the same legislators would scream about state preemption and (rightly) smack them down.

And if SCOTUS had let this stand it would make 'sanctuary cities' untouchable. Probably not something most folks here would think of as a good thing.

Finally the whole idea that ANYTHING can be produced, purchased and used in a single state is ridiculous these days. There is no way that everything used in the manufacture of even a popsicle stick involves only in-state produced materials and services.

The whole premise is ridiculous on it's face, and the fact that the 'gun lobby' is spending time and resources defending stupidity like this when there's real fights to fight must have the Bloomberg's and Soros's laughing out loud.

 

[Russ-T]

This was a stupid law that was pure political grandstanding. It's actually good they got schooled in SCOTUS so other states won't imitate their idiocy.

They could have done what many other states did and say that no local resources could be used to assist in certain federal activities, and that would have been fine.

Instead they tried to nullify any federal law which 'they' thought was 'unconstitutional'. Who the 'they' was who was determining all this wasn't specified. SCOTUS? Legislature? Bob at the local gun shop?

And trying to nullify federal law itself violates the constitution. The Founders clearly stated that federal laws supersede state law in the same was state law supersedes local ordinances.

If some liberal locality in Mizzou tried to ban 'assault weapons', the same legislators would scream about state preemption and (rightly) smack them down.

And if SCOTUS had let this stand it would make 'sanctuary cities' untouchable. Probably not something most folks here would think of as a good thing.

Finally the whole idea that ANYTHING can be produced, purchased and used in a single state is ridiculous these days. There is no way that everything used in the manufacture of even a popsicle stick involves only in-state produced materials and services.

The whole premise is ridiculous on it's face, and the fact that the 'gun lobby' is spending time and resources defending stupidity like this when there's real fights to fight must have the Bloomberg's and Soros's laughing out loud.

Thanks for the analysis and details. This makes a lot of sense to me, but people (including myself to some extent) are so distracted with so much going on in the news cycle, that the headlines tend to drive the narrative. We should all be more cautious and cognizant of this when being constantly bombarded with propaganda from every side.

 

[spencer60]

I just happened to run across a podcast where they were talking about this exact case, and why it was rejected by SCOTUS. Just shows that 'our side' can grandstand as well as the gun grabbers can.

 

[GeauxLSU]

And trying to nullify federal law itself violates the constitution. The Founders clearly stated that federal laws supersede state law in the same was state law supersedes local ordinances.

The problem with this statement, and apparently the entire point of whatever podcast, it all presumes the law is Constitutional. Go back and re-read everything you wrote assuming the law in question is unConstitutional. Now what?
Federal law does not blanketly "supersede" state law. The Constitution does. Period and full stop. The federal government has explicit, VERY limited powers. That's the point of a Republic. (Which is irrelevant to the state county relationship.) But I will grant you, we no longer have a republic. Obviously.
Thomas, is correct, again. I bet Comey is too.

 

[alex4922]

God bless the founders of our Republic ! Every single one of them would be turning over in their grave if they could see the flagrant abuse of our constitutional rights.

 

[the_great_white]

The federal government has explicit, VERY limited powers.

Someone should let them know that