Is This Rifle Going To Provide Harris The Excuse She Wants?

[Jimi Jah]

The Toe won't ban anything because she won't be elected.

[sigstroker]

The real problem is time. For instance, take Portantino's storage law. The Google AI response to whether it is Constitutional is that The California Supreme Court has ruled that the measures which have been passed and, presumably, the measures being passed do not violate California's Constitution; thus, they are Constitutional. I'm not sure if that's true as the response doesn't provide much of anything by way of detail or citation, but it does provide an 'answer,' of sorts, as to how they think it'll survive a legal challenge. The issue on that score would be McDonald where the 2nd Amendment was incorporated to the states.

The "lawfare" the Left is using forces us to go through the System to challenge everything they pass and given that the Left pretty much still controls the courts through the 9th Circuit when it comes to California and the reluctance of the current SCOTUS to 'reach down' preemptively and take cases before they've worked their way through the System, that means time; from months to years. Then we have to wait and see if SCOTUS will actually take up the case. Presumably all this time wasting allows the Left to cause as much chaos and damage as possible pending a decision and it buys them time to ensconce a Leftist President with a Senate controlled by Democrats to, once again, turn SCOTUS to the Left.

In short, blatantly unconstitutional to us or not, even with SCOTUS being 'sympathetic,' I wouldn't simply count on the courts to automatically overrule and negate anything in a 'timely' fashion. Not to mention what the Left has waiting in the wings even if their Legislative attempts are overturned in the short to mid terms. That's why the Presidential Election isn't and shouldn't be the sole focus of our efforts. We need to get the Senate back so that SCOTUS has their backs covered insofar as their perceived willingness to rule in our favor and to hold on to a 'Conservative' majority as long as possible. Remember, Alito and Thomas aren't getting any younger, with a couple of other, newer members being somewhat 'disappointing' in terms of their perceived 'consistency' with being on 'our side.'

I wouldn't trust google AI any further than I could throw the servers it's being run on.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

...That's why the Presidential Election isn't and shouldn't be the sole focus of our efforts. We need to get the Senate back so that SCOTUS has their backs covered insofar as their perceived willingness to rule in our favor and to hold on to a 'Conservative' majority as long as possible. Remember, Alito and Thomas aren't getting any younger, with a couple of other, newer members being somewhat 'disappointing' in terms of their perceived 'consistency' with being on 'our side.'

Harris could win the presidency but lose the Senate, giving Republicans a veto over her agenda and judges

The prospect of a President Kamala Harris facing down a Republican-controlled Senate is coming into focus as she rises in the 2024 contest, even as GOP hopes of capturing the Senate grow because of improving polling in a pivotal Montana race.

A Republican-controlled chamber could thwart Harris’ nominees to fill out her administration and the courts, along with her legislative agenda. Top Senate Republicans told NBC News she would need their sign-off to secure votes on any judicial nominees, including for the Supreme Court. And some Harris supporters worry that without a united Congress, she would struggle to get much done legislatively...

Looks like I'm not the only one thinking along those lines.