Five Democrats Warn Supreme Court It
Could be 'Restructured;' Urge It
to Drop 2nd Amendment Case
Cybercast News,
by
Susan Jones
Original Article
Posted By: M2,
8/15/2019 10:15:17 AM
Five Democrat senators have filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court, urging it to stay out of a pending Second Amendment case and warning it that a majority of Americans now believe the "Supreme Court should be restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics."
The case, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. City of New York, is the first major challenge to gun laws since 2010, the senators said.
According to SCOTUS blog, the New York State Pistol and Rifle Association, representing gun owners who live in the city, are challenging the city's ban on transferring licensed, unloaded guns anywhere outside city limits --
Reply 1 - Posted by:
PChristopher 8/15/2019 10:18:55 AM (No. 152857)
Another reason why the Commucrats should be outlawed
22 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
earlybird 8/15/2019 10:19:35 AM (No. 152858)
Sometimes there are no surprises...
14 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
law428 8/15/2019 10:21:40 AM (No. 152860)
The Dems have little or no regard for the separation of powers designed by our Founding Fathers. For that matter they seem to have no regard for anyone or anything except their own attempt to regain power at any cost.
30 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
curious1 8/15/2019 10:27:51 AM (No. 152869)
They are really running scared. And they are vicious. Plan accordingly.
25 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
paral04 8/15/2019 10:33:22 AM (No. 152875)
How do they plan to do that? Congress can't just wave a magic wand and throw out our Constitution as much as the treasonous leftists would like.
10 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
BarryNo 8/15/2019 10:39:51 AM (No. 152887)
They have abused the power of their office and should resign, immediately. But Dems have no shame, and wouldn't do the right thing, even when caught with their pants down - which happens pretty often with Democrats.
14 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
Avanti1 8/15/2019 10:40:44 AM (No. 152888)
Politicization of the Supreme Court began under Democrats (remember Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas, Bret Kavenaugh, etc.?) and the infringement on legislative power by judicial activist judges.
Now they violate separation of powers by threatening a coequal branch of government.
10 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
AGGW 8/15/2019 10:52:37 AM (No. 152895)
No, a majority of Americans do NOT believe the Supreme Court needs to be restructured. That is a false statement in their brief.
23 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
RCFLyer98 8/15/2019 10:56:08 AM (No. 152902)
Agree #8. Not sure where "they" came up with the idea that "most" Americans believe the Supreme Court should be restructured. "They" did not poll me.
20 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
cor-vet 8/15/2019 10:57:24 AM (No. 152905)
Maybe the Supreme Court could take up restructuring of the US Senate, by limiting blue states to 1 Senator.
18 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
CEP 8/15/2019 11:03:52 AM (No. 152913)
Talk about making something up. No the majority of Americans don't believe the Supreme Court should be restructured. Knock off your making garbage up because you don't like something and then saying the majority of Americans this or that. The majority of Americans think you democrat senators are totally nuts and liars.
11 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
ginadee 8/15/2019 11:10:54 AM (No. 152920)
A few liberal congress critters dictating to the Supremes? That's a real hoot!
Congress Critters, do you have a copy of the Constitution? I suggest you read it. It was written by gallant men who were so much better than you. Did I mention that they loved our country and it's people?
14 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
GoodDeal 8/15/2019 11:37:09 AM (No. 152947)
Sounds like a threat to me.
8 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
mc squared 8/15/2019 11:59:11 AM (No. 152968)
It's because they are likely to lose. People's feeling about guns are not relevant to the suit.
9 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
Starboard_side 8/15/2019 12:05:24 PM (No. 152977)
Maybe the liberals who enacted the law in NYC should have thought a bit more before they enacted it, which likely violates the Constitution.
That 5 hard-core Democrat Senators decided to write a letter, no less, stating their demands is unprecedented, I believe.
It proves they aren't able to set-aside their biases and judge things independently.
It's this type of hardened opinions that is destroying the legal system's "a jury trial of your peers".
5 people like this.
Such hypocrisy when it’s well known that liberals shop their lawsuits against the president to left-leaning circuit courts.
6 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
Laotzu 8/15/2019 12:23:03 PM (No. 152998)
The first time the Dems threatened to mess with the Court was under Tsar Roosevelt. It was the direct cause of our now perverse reading of the Commerce Clause, whereby everything is interstate commerce. Everything. Not just the commerce that involves two states. Everything. That means the federal government had newly discovered constitutional authority to regulate Everything.
We are on our way to unwinding that mess, along with the invented constitutional right to abortion. And they Democrat response is the same as any other issue -- don't try to win the game by the rules; they try to win the game by changing the rules to so that loss is impossible. This describes Democrat policy since Clinton took office.
6 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
LadyHen 8/15/2019 12:36:05 PM (No. 153016)
"Nice court you got there. Be a shame if something happened to it."
6 people like this.
Reply 19 - Posted by:
Nevadadad46 8/15/2019 12:50:32 PM (No. 153028)
Isn't this illegal? If not, it should be!
7 people like this.
Reply 20 - Posted by:
Daisymay 8/15/2019 1:47:12 PM (No. 153115)
Well, isn't that Special! Same old, same old. Democrats had better lose the House in 2020 or we will see more and more of these kinds of threats! I wouldn't put it past them to try it. They can't win elections that would allow them to put another Supreme Court judge on the Court, so how about doing it by changing the Rules!!
2 people like this.
Reply 21 - Posted by:
Smart11344 8/15/2019 1:53:24 PM (No. 153123)
Progressive Democrats are over loaded with wet dreams. What a disgusting, deplorable gaggle of "people". And I use that term loosely.
1 person likes this.
Reply 22 - Posted by:
Chuzzles 8/15/2019 1:56:35 PM (No. 153127)
They really keep jumping the shark don't they? They have no real authority to do what they want to do except to try and intimidate the Justices. Can't have the Court keep ruling in Trump's favor now can we? The Court has done nothing wrong except rule from the bench with commonsense. That favors Americans. A crime in their book.
1 person likes this.
Reply 23 - Posted by:
geoguy 8/15/2019 2:20:05 PM (No. 153157)
I believe we should abolish the 17thAmendment and return to the original intent of Constitution where the Senators were appointed by the States.
4 people like this.
Reply 24 - Posted by:
JHHolliday 8/15/2019 2:33:51 PM (No. 153170)
Re #24. Maybe we should go all the way back to the founding and restrict the vote only to free men who owned property. We could very well be better off.
5 people like this.
Reply 25 - Posted by:
Geoman 8/15/2019 5:07:39 PM (No. 153296)
Sounds like an extortion attempt involving a pending court case. Barr could convene as grand jury and indict them.
2 people like this.
Reply 26 - Posted by:
DVC 8/15/2019 6:28:47 PM (No. 153366)
Because they KNOW that the Sullivan law is highly likely to wind up in the dustbin of unconstitutional laws, just like the gun laws in Chicago did. And now Illinois has (because it was REQUIRED TO do it) a shall issue concealed carry law. Unfortunately, they do not recognize any out of state CCW permits, but it is much better for folks in Illinois now.
Probably coming to NY, too.
1 person likes this.
Reply 27 - Posted by:
anniebc 8/15/2019 11:54:03 PM (No. 153535)
Sounds like terrorists to me. Just sayin'.
0 people like this.
Reply 28 - Posted by:
EQKimball 8/16/2019 1:05:50 AM (No. 153563)
Threatening political retaliation against the court in a filed brief constitutes direct contempt. There is likely no precedent for this, The Court cannot ignore it, but short of a finding of contempt the Court should at least strike the brief in its entirety and indicate it will not be considered. The vote should be 9-0.
1 person likes this.
Reply 29 - Posted by:
kono 8/16/2019 12:33:08 PM (No. 153973)
NOW they want SCOTUS to keep out of politicized issues? What, like they did in Roe v. Wade? Or in nullifying anti-sodomy laws? Legislating leftist from the bench is treated as a virtue in the double-standard of the Left, just like preaching sermons that promote Democrats is encouraged, while preaching against the anti-biblical tenets of 'Progressivism' (like abortion and gay marriage) is treated like justification to revoke the tax-free status of churches.
0 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "M2"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
Comments:
Whitehouse, Hirono, Blumenthal, Durbin, and Gillibrand