Pro 2nd Amend. Supreme Court justices fear that John Roberts is NOT

We know Roberts is anti-RKBA. All is great with Judge Barrett until Souter or Thomas croak (who are 81 and 72, respectively) and Biden nominates a replacement, or simply packs the court with 4 new justices.

if Trump is in .. Roberts needs to retire and a few others .. don't be like Ruth ..

C3D said:

We know Roberts is anti-RKBA. All is great with Judge Barrett until Souter or Thomas croak (who are 81 and 72, respectively) and Biden nominates a replacement, or simply packs the court with 4 new justices.

Click to expand...

The stupid bastard doesn't comprehend the Constitution. As fast as he can dial 911 he'd have federal protection around his house. The rest of us troglodytes are left to fend for ourselves.

C3D said:

We know Roberts is anti-RKBA. All is great with Judge Barrett until Souter or Thomas croak (who are 81 and 72, respectively) and Biden nominates a replacement, or simply packs the court with 4 new justices.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately for Biden.....Trump is going to win.
Hopefully maybe over the next 4 years one or more of the activist justices will retire and allow Trump to name a 4th.
Or maybe Thomas will retire in the 4th year to keep the numbers.......that would be nice of him.

Would have been nice if Souter Alito retired now instead of trying to RBG it.

C3D said:

Would have been nice if Souter retired now instead of trying to RBG it.

Click to expand...

I think you mean Breyer? Souter retired in 2009.

Criticalt said:

Unfortunately for Biden.....Trump is going to win.
Hopefully maybe over the next 4 years one or more of the activist justices will retire and allow Trump to name a 4th.
Or maybe Thomas will retire in the 4th year to keep the numbers.......that would be nice of him.

Click to expand...

Not 4 years. Not if there is any chance of losing the senate in 2022.

That was RBG's mistake. Once the Senate flipped she was screwed. She could have retired in 2015 and Trump would still have named her replacement, right after Scalia's.

spat said:

Not 4 years. Not if there is any chance of losing the senate in 2022.

That was RBG's mistake. Once the Senate flipped she was screwed. She could have retired in 2015 and Trump would still have named her replacement, right after Scalia's.

Click to expand...

She played a political game and lost. If not for hubris she would have looked at her history of multiple cancer diagnoses and retired early enough for Obama to replace her.

nortatoga said:

I think you mean Breyer? Souter retired in 2009.

Click to expand...

I meant Alito. I think I need to retire now that I get these senior moments more and more.

C3D said:

I meant Alito. I think I need to retire now that I get these senior moments more and more.

Click to expand...

Alito is 70 and Thomas is 72, I would think Breyer may be next he is 83.

It will be a nail biter election night folks ... ALL the way around .. Senate, house, and POTUS

livingston said:

It will be a nail biter election night folks ... ALL the way around .. Senate, house, and POTUS

Click to expand...

it shouldn't be at all!

livingston said:

It will be a nail biter election night folks ... ALL the way around .. Senate, house, and POTUS

Click to expand...

The way things are going, it might be a head-throbbing election MONTH!

No matter how many make belief pro-gun Justices are appointed, they will always reposition themselves as minority. Supreme Court is made up of habitual liars. That's how they get this job, especially on the Conservative side. Why don't they just shut the fuck up while they do backstabbing. I am glad Scalia is dead and hope all others will follow.

Mosinitis said:

No matter how many make belief pro-gun Justices are appointed, they will always reposition themselves as minority. Supreme Court is made up of habitual liars. That's how they get this job, especially on the Conservative side. Why don't they just shut the fuck up while they do backstabbing. I am glad Scalia is dead and hope all others will follow.

Click to expand...

The gun community is better off with SCOTUS than with congress.
When was the last pro gun law passed by congress?
It is almost impossible for the House, Senate and POTUS to pass pro gun legislation. The Republicans had all 3 in 2016-2018 and did NOTHING for gun rights. We all begged them.....but nothing.
At least SCOTUS had Heller vs DC and MacDonald vs Chicago.......and another I cant remember in the last decade. Not that they did much but its more than congress has done in 50 years.
Republican senators and house members are a bunch of wimps.
They know they can promise their constituents pro gun legislation for decades and still get elected. Repub voters tend to vote down party lines regardless of their politicians track record. The alternative is to not vote, or vote dem or 3rd party....which is sacrilege to most right leaning voters.
SCOTUS is our only option but just getting a case to them is nye impossible.
Which brings me to this......
We the people should have a choice on what the SCOTUS hears.
Having them be in complete control of what the hear is just wrong.
Like choosing to hear the case about the WW1 memorial cross in 2019.
Thats more important than choosing a gun case?
Guns have the country split and is one of the most polarizing issues in our nations history and there are dozens of cases waiting.......but they chose the cross????
They are as cowardly as congress but if we had some say maybe they would be forced.
Equal amount of people on both sides want these gun issues decided one way or another.

Defilade said:

it shouldn't be at all!

Click to expand...

It won't be. Unless the polls are more wrong than they ever have been, and by a wide margin, the only race in play is the senate.

As for Roberts it's clear he's a liberal judge now, so with amy on the court it will be a 5:4.

Blimey said:

It won't be. Unless the polls are more wrong than they ever have been, and by a wide margin, the only race in play is the senate.

As for Roberts it's clear he's a liberal judge now, so with amy on the court it will be a 5:4.

Click to expand...

Liberal judge now ..Always has been.. The Manchurian judge if we ever had one...

Criticalt said:

The gun community is better off with SCOTUS than with congress.
When was the last pro gun law passed by congress?
It is almost impossible for the House, Senate and POTUS to pass pro gun legislation. The Republicans had all 3 in 2016-2018 and did NOTHING for gun rights. We all begged them.....but nothing.
At least SCOTUS had Heller vs DC and MacDonald vs Chicago.......and another I cant remember in the last decade. Not that they did much but its more than congress has done in 50 years.
Republican senators and house members are a bunch of wimps.
They know they can promise their constituents pro gun legislation for decades and still get elected. Repub voters tend to vote down party lines regardless of their politicians track record. The alternative is to not vote, or vote dem or 3rd party....which is sacrilege to most right leaning voters.
SCOTUS is our only option but just getting a case to them is nye impossible.
Which brings me to this......
We the people should have a choice on what the SCOTUS hears.
Having them be in complete control of what the hear is just wrong.
Like choosing to hear the case about the WW1 memorial cross in 2019.
Thats more important than choosing a gun case?
Guns have the country split and is one of the most polarizing issues in our nations history and there are dozens of cases waiting.......but they chose the cross????
They are as cowardly as congress but if we had some say maybe they would be forced.
Equal amount of people on both sides want these gun issues decided one way or another.

Click to expand...

Divorce gun rights advocacy from the republican party and let both parties compete for pro-gun votes. Similar to AARP. Loyal one-party voters get screwed by both parties.

Criticalt said:

The gun community is better off with SCOTUS than with congress.
When was the last pro gun law passed by congress?
It is almost impossible for the House, Senate and POTUS to pass pro gun legislation. The Republicans had all 3 in 2016-2018 and did NOTHING for gun rights. We all begged them.....but nothing.
At least SCOTUS had Heller vs DC and MacDonald vs Chicago.......and another I cant remember in the last decade. Not that they did much but its more than congress has done in 50 years.
Republican senators and house members are a bunch of wimps.
They know they can promise their constituents pro gun legislation for decades and still get elected. Repub voters tend to vote down party lines regardless of their politicians track record. The alternative is to not vote, or vote dem or 3rd party....which is sacrilege to most right leaning voters.
SCOTUS is our only option but just getting a case to them is nye impossible.
Which brings me to this......
We the people should have a choice on what the SCOTUS hears.
Having them be in complete control of what the hear is just wrong.
Like choosing to hear the case about the WW1 memorial cross in 2019.
Thats more important than choosing a gun case?
Guns have the country split and is one of the most polarizing issues in our nations history and there are dozens of cases waiting.......but they chose the cross????
They are as cowardly as congress but if we had some say maybe they would be forced.
Equal amount of people on both sides want these gun issues decided one way or another.

Click to expand...

You are correct.

The best we can hope for from congress is just "no new bad stuff". Realistically the best a pro-gun representative can do is "vote against the bad stuff when it comes up".

Generally congress adds laws and SCOTUS removes them. Since we are looking to remove them, we need SCOTUS. I am hopeful of the new direction Trump has taken the court, not optimistic, but hopeful.

I was petrified when we lost Scalia.

As we have seen, It is not enough for the Republicans to hold both houses and the presidency. You need actual conservatives to hold all 3.

There are a lot of RINOs in congress. If you count the RINOs as the Demorcats they really are, we haven't had both branches and the presidency since at least Eisenhower.