Peņa v. Cid (Handgun Roster) **CERT DENIED 6-15-2020**

[miglo]

This has been the operating theory for some years now. First the problem was Kennedy, now it's Roberts. Let's hope there's nobody else in line behind those two, and that Trump wins re-election, and that we control the Senate, and that RBG / Breyer decide to retire tomorrow.

Gorsuch has been proven to be a disappointment so far. We just can't catch a break.

[steelrain82]

So are all these cases now dead? Or do they sit and wait for next year?

[Jedi54]

Dead

[kuug]

So are all these cases now dead? Or do they sit and wait for next year?

Those cases are dead, Rodriguez is next. Our only concern at this point is hoping Trump wins in November, the Republicans keep the Senate, and any one of Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, or Kagan passes on so we can replace them for someone who actually cares about the constitution.

[cre8nhavoc]

The roster case should've been a slam dunk for the SCOTUS. It's simple, California is breaking the decision made in the Heller case. SCOTUS said that manufacturers will not and should not be required to modify firearms to meet a states requirement. Everything about the roster is a direct opposite of that ruling.

[aBrowningfan]

Those cases are dead, Rodriguez is next. Our only concern at this point is hoping Trump wins in November, the Republicans keep the Senate, and any one of Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, or Kagan passes on so we can replace them for someone who actually cares about the constitution.

Lot of concerns.

[varanidguy]

Those cases are dead, Rodriguez is next. Our only concern at this point is hoping Trump wins in November, the Republicans keep the Senate, and any one of Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, or Kagan passes on so we can replace them for someone who actually cares about the constitution.

Trump and the Republicans are limp noodles on the 2A. They don't care about it, they don't care about our 2A rights, it's simply a campaign slogan for them to gain votes. None of their actions ever matches with their campaign rhetoric.

[kuug]

Lot of concerns.

Welcome to 2010, we're right back where we started from after McDonald

[kuug]

Trump and the Republicans are limp noodles on the 2A. They don't care about it, they don't care about our 2A rights, it's simply a campaign slogan for them to gain votes. None of their actions ever matches with their campaign rhetoric.

Yes they are but their choice to default to federalist society judges is our last best hope for long term change, turning the supreme court conservative again is the top reason to vote R in November same as it was in 2016

if we lose Biden could replace up to 3 justices with Ginsburg, Breyer, and Thomas starting to show their age

[sulla123]

Trump and the Republicans are limp noodles on the 2A. They don't care about it, they don't care about our 2A rights, it's simply a campaign slogan for them to gain votes. None of their actions ever matches with their campaign rhetoric.

That type of thinking and rhetoric is EXACTLY how the dems lost in 2016. They got complacent/disillusioned, and stayed home. Gun rights across the nation, with the exception of 8 blue socialist states have expanded greatly since 1994. Now is not the time to hang our heads and cry about it. If the R's DON'T win, you can forget about having to buy off roster guns and make rifles featureless, because the Dems will absolutely be coming for them. Biden and O'Dummy made that clear.

[varanidguy]

That type of thinking and rhetoric is EXACTLY how the dems lost in 2016. They got complacent/disillusioned, and stayed home. Gun rights across the nation, with the exception of 8 blue socialist states have expanded greatly since 1994. Now is not the time to hang our heads and cry about it. If the R's DON'T win, you can forget about having to buy off roster guns and make rifles featureless, because the Dems will absolutely be coming for them. Biden and O'Dummy made that clear.

Trump has enacted more gun control than Obama ever did (not an Obama supporter, but this take is cold).

Trump and the Republicans had two years to make good on their promises to strengthen and expand 2A rights at the federal level and they didn't do anything.

Local and state governments operate differently, at the federal level, Republicans are absolutely worthless on the 2A.

[gumby]

The 2A is federal and therefore only federal law should apply so, why do the states and local government have any say in this?

[godofgamblers]

Trump has enacted more gun control than Obama ever did (not an Obama supporter, but this take is cold).

Trump and the Republicans had two years to make good on their promises to strengthen and expand 2A rights at the federal level and they didn't do anything.

Local and state governments operate differently, at the federal level, Republicans are absolutely worthless on the 2A.

True, R's have been absolutely worthless on the 2A. However, that seems to ignore that the other alternative isn't working to absolutely trying to dismantle 2A (and other amendments). I consider a vote for the Republicans as more or less the status quo -- so basically nothing much happens. I consider a vote for the Dems (or throwing away your vote with 3rd party) as actively taking a chainsaw to the 2A (and the 1A and 4A and the 5A). I rather have nothing gained nothing ventured instead of shredding the constitution.

[varanidguy]

The 2A is federal and therefore only federal law should apply so, why do the states and local government have any say in this?

The 2A is the red-headed unwanted stepchild of civil rights. Demonstrated by the lack of any action by SCOTUS, and very little action by the lower courts. Both parties at large don't care for it, and many don't even want it to exist.

True, R's have been absolutely worthless on the 2A. However, that seems to ignore that the other alternative isn't working to absolutely trying to dismantle 2A (and other amendments). I consider a vote for the Republicans as more or less the status quo -- so basically nothing much happens. I consider a vote for the Dems (or throwing away your vote with 3rd party) as actively taking a chainsaw to the 2A (and the 1A and 4A and the 5A). I rather have nothing gained nothing ventured instead of shredding the constitution.

It's funny, if everyone who said voting 3rd party is "throwing your vote away" actually did it, a 3rd party would win or at least gain significant enough ground to become viable. Remember, Lincoln was 3rd party.

[godofgamblers]

It's funny, if everyone who said voting 3rd party is "throwing your vote away" actually did it, a 3rd party would win or at least gain significant enough ground to become viable. Remember, Lincoln was 3rd party.

Please point me to a third party today that has the same level of support the Republicans had in 1860, or heck, even 1856. Not that it can't happen eventually, but it's not present right now. When there's a viable option then we can talk about it.