Do You Want Nine Justices or Fifteen Hearing Second Amendment Cases?

U.S. Supreme Court Image NRA-ILA
U.S. Supreme Court Image NRA-ILA

Georgia/United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- The Georgia Senate runoff elections that involve Senators Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue come down to one very simple question: Do you want nine justices to hear Second Amendment cases? This is perhaps the fundamental question to ask any Second Amendment supporter who is sitting on the sidelines.

As it stands right, now, the current composition of the Supreme Court makes narrow pro-Second Amendment rulings by six justices very likely. Why? As we discussed earlier, the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court has John Roberts in a bind that is favorable to Second Amendment supporters.

What is that bind? If Roberts votes to uphold things like magazine bans, semi-auto bans, or other anti-Second Amendment laws, and the other five justices appointed by Republican presidents vote to strike them down, then he has no influence. Why? Because by being in the minority, he will not be able to assign the opinion. That duty would then be carried out by the senior associate justice on the Supreme Court.

Right now, the person in that position is none other than Clarence Thomas. It is highly likely that he would, given his past excoriations of the Supreme Court’s refusal to address the Second Amendment, be eager to write the opinion himself (an option that the justice assigning the opinion has). We could expect something sweeping in that instance. To avoid that, Roberts would have to join the other five justices, and he would then be able to assign the opinion to a justice who might make a more narrow ruling.

Of course, this is if the Supreme Court stays at nine members. Remember, during the campaign, Biden and Senate Democrats refused to rule out adding more justices. Unlike President Trump, Biden has not mentioned who he would put on the Supreme Court. In all likelihood, they would be hostile to our rights.

Do you really think that Biden, with his long history of hostility for our rights, would pass up the chance to pack the court to provide a thin veneer of legal justification for whatever attacks he has in mind? Do you trust folks like Jon Tester and Joe Manchin to be the firewall against such schemes?

The fact is, a 50-50 Senate will lead to a packed Supreme Court, which places our rights at extreme risk. Not only do we risk losing our Second Amendment rights, but we could also easily see our First Amendment rights abridged as well… with the system rigged against us for the foreseeable future. Second Amendment supporters need to back the re-election efforts of Senators Loeffler and Perdue, then also support the National Rifle Association’s Political Victory Fund and their Institute for Legislative Action, in order to be ready for 2022 and 2024.


About Harold Hutchison

Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.

Harold Hutchison

23 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Stag
Stag (@eriggle83)
11 months ago

It doesn’t matter what some politician in robes “decides” regarding arms. According to the 2A all arms laws are unconstitutional. Rights are not granted by government so even if the 2A was abolished we would still have those rights. The government would just be refusing to acknowledge them instead of pretending to acknowledge them like they do today. If you’re looking to the SCOTUS to save the day then you’re in for a rude awakening.

CourageousLion
CourageousLion (@wizardkiller)
11 months ago

I’d like to see ZERO hearing cases and ZERO cases to be heard. It should be WIDELY UNDERSTOOD THAT SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED MEANS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Maybe we need to start being our own judges in the matter.

Darkman
Darkman (@darkman)
11 months ago
Reply to  CourageousLion

As much as I agree. I don’t see enough ambition among POTG to do what needs to be done. It’s easier to scream at the Interweb and allow the enemy to win than to risk everything for Freedom. Simply because doing nothing affords a longer life even if it means living under Tyranny. When people Fear the consequences of fighting for their Freedom/Rights…More than they fear the loss of those Freedoms/Rights… They have become subjects and allowed Tyranny to Prevail. “If a man hasn’t discovered something that he will die for, he isn’t fit to live.” Martin Luther King, Jr.

JNew
JNew (@j_new)
11 months ago

Progressive liberals: change the rules, win the game.

Core
Core (@core)
11 months ago

Sorry Democrats you do not get to change the rules every election you pithy tyrants. The truth is the SCOTUS is unable to handle the volume of Article VI violations at State levels due to abuses by Democrat leadership. SCOTUS needs more resources to take on more unconstitutional cases.

Last edited 11 months ago by Core
Ram
Ram (@ram)
11 months ago

A packed court will give the Democrats what they’ve always wanted.
SCOTUS set on a perpetual Marxist default, so they can legislate
from the bench. They would be impervious to any efforts to revive
our nation’s heritage.

KDude
KDude (@kdude)
11 months ago

Thus far in our Republic’s history, so many courts and judges have had so much trouble understanding what the average eighth grader can read and assimilate : “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. I doubt adding more judges to SCOTUS is gonna make much difference one way or the other. Any old way, this is the law I live by, and will be upheld on pain of death for any public servant attempting to break it and illegally try to rob me of property and liberty. Hope that’s clear. All the rest… Read more »

CourageousLion
CourageousLion (@wizardkiller)
11 months ago
Reply to  KDude

You and I are surely on the same page! No “law” should exist for a crime unless there is a victim involved. If you are willing to cage or kill me for keeping the fruits of my labor, YOU are the criminal, not me. If you are willing to cage or kill me enforcing a law telling me that I cannot smoke, eat or drink what I want, YOU are the criminal not me. If you are willing to cage me or kill me while enforcing a law that says that I can’t own a certain type of gun or because… Read more »

Z
Z (@ghost21bravo24)
11 months ago

People will March right up Pennsylvania Ave with firearms in tow….DC Police don’t have enough man power to stop a million plus gun owners…!!!!

Core
Core (@core)
11 months ago
Reply to  Z

You bet. Come January it’s civil war. The People will take the republic back and the tyrants will be held to the fire. There will be no infighting: they will try to mobilize their brownshirts but they will fall.

tetejaun
tetejaun (@tetejaun)
11 months ago

The question is moot: Biden, by massive voter fraud, has won the election. At every stage of investigation, democrat ‘judges’ are crapping on the law, as is Barr and the FBI. Massive amounts of money talk loudly. Zuckie, the communist Chinese and Soros have been busy buying politicians and ‘judges’. Americans, unlike ANY other people on Earth, have the absolute Right & Duty to arrest criminals, protect (by any means) the Constitution and rout voter fraud utilizing their Second Amendment Rights. BUT…cowardice has Americans by the balls and their FEAR of losing ANYTHING, losing any of their ‘stuff’, is a… Read more »

JSNMGC
JSNMGC (@jsnmgc)
11 months ago
Reply to  tetejaun

Schumer wasn’t at the 2/28/18 meeting.

The whole world already knew the views Feinstein and Schumer held (for decades) regarding gun control. Trump did not encourage gun control to “feel out his foes.”

Read the transcripts of the meeting and/or watch the video – I’ve posted it several times. He couldn’t have been more clear that he wanted more gun control and he bragged several times that he was just the guy to get it done after previous presidents had failed.

Your references to the military are irrelevant.

You may be suffering from TDS-Type B.

Z
Z (@ghost21bravo24)
11 months ago
Reply to  JSNMGC

Civil war is gaining Strength as we speak and no I’m not suffering from TDS-type B……A—hole…!!!

JSNMGC
JSNMGC (@jsnmgc)
11 months ago
Reply to  Z

What facts are you disagreeing with?

Core
Core (@core)
11 months ago
Reply to  Z

You bet. We are done with these tyrants.

CourageousLion
CourageousLion (@wizardkiller)
11 months ago
Reply to  Z

JSNMGC doesn’t seem to be responding to you in any way. Try reading and comprehending. It might help.

JSNMGC
JSNMGC (@jsnmgc)
11 months ago
Reply to  CourageousLion

Look two posts above yours – I asked him what he was disagreeing with.

My point is the same as yours – he should either read the transcripts or watch the video.

I voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020, but I understand why some in the firearm community did not vote for him in 2020. They are fed up with Republican politicians encouraging more gun control and they are tired of hearing “the Democrat will be much worse.” I believe this group is trying to send a message to future Republican candidates.

CourageousLion
CourageousLion (@wizardkiller)
11 months ago
Reply to  tetejaun

“You did not have the balls to join the military and now you whine the BATFE took your Rambo toy. Summer soldiers and sunshine patriots.” First off, the military isn’t supposed to be a standing military. 2nd off, show me where being in the military has anything to do with having balls. Most are nothing but paid mercenaries that are killing people defending their own countries. Most work for the international banking cartels and oil cartels and are nothing but robbers in uniform paid to do the will of these criminal organizations. So SHOVE YOUR YOU DO NOT HAVE THE… Read more »

Last edited 11 months ago by CourageousLion
alzada
alzada (@alzada)
11 months ago
Reply to  CourageousLion

“The end democracy and the defeat of the AMERICAN REVOLUTION will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations ”
Thomas Jefferson.

JSNMGC
JSNMGC (@jsnmgc)
11 months ago
Reply to  alzada

When the majority discovers they can vote to have the government take from the minority and give to them.

I can choose to not take out a loan and I can choose to not buy an iPhone. I cannot choose to not pay my taxes which politicians use a part of to give to people who will vote for them.

Stag
Stag (@eriggle83)
11 months ago
Reply to  tetejaun

Trump unconstitutionally ordered the DOJ to “do something” about bumpstocks so they did by unconstitutionally declaring them “machine guns” and banning them. Trump signed the unconstitutional FixNICS into law when he signed the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2018. Trump actively supported the TAPS Act, red flag laws, AWB, suppressor ban, body armor ban, and raising the age to purchase arms. Trump actually enacted arms laws and called for much more and yet you refuse to hold him accountable. You’re a clown.

JSNMGC
JSNMGC (@jsnmgc)
11 months ago
Reply to  Stag

TDS-Type B Trump Derangement Syndrome – Type B. People who have this mental illness say they believe in the Republican platform (smaller government, no more gun control, stopping illegal immigration, etc.), but they become unhinged when others point out instances of Trump working against those policies.  They are so invested emotionally in the cult of Donald Trump that they refuse to acknowledge facts and lash out at anyone who points out instances of Trump’s deviation from his own platform. They create the most unbelievable rationale to explain Trump’s deviation from conservative principles, frequently citing some multi-level variation of chess that Trump is… Read more »

Last edited 11 months ago by JSNMGC
Stag
Stag (@eriggle83)
11 months ago
Reply to  JSNMGC

Damn, I heard that mic drop from here!