Update: DOJ reverses course, seeking to keep the appeals going. And: SCOTUS heard arguments over a federal law banning firearm possession by users of illegal drugs.
This court has egregiously ruled against precedent in several major cases - often in ways I completely disagree with.
But Bruen (and particularly Bruen + Rahimi) takes the cake in terms of absolutely stupid decisions. Suddenly judges are expected to do the work of American History grad students and, as noted in this excellent writeup, without the benefit of either Congress's words or (assumed) intents - a strange leg to stand on for the originalist/textualist wing of the court.
In the words of the late justice Scalia (words that everyone assume pointed at justice Thomas) "I'm an originalist, but I'm not a nut"
I must confess a deep sense of satisfaction in seeing how the mighty (large law firms pretending to be in favor of liberal values) have fallen. Not that I wouldn't welcome them back into the fold if they would go out and do some important pro bono work.
The Law Firm Executive Orders: Brad Karp's and Paul Weiss's ignominy is completed by the DOJ's withdrawal of any defense of the Law Firm EOs. The lesson is as simple as this: Paul Weiss capitulated and emboldened a bullying administration bent on demanding compliance with government orthodoxy -- a mockery of the First Amendment and to the notion that big law firms act independently on behalf of clients, without fear of government opposition. Karp and Paul Weiss are case studies in venal defeatism, even when the principles on the table are among the most important to the polity and profession. Just an absolute disgrace.
The Continued Saga of the Bungled Second Amendment. This saga began with the outcome determinative faux history provided by Scalia in Heller, which at least made room for reasonable time, place, type and manner restrictions on gun usage, ownership and location. Bruen is a story of seemingly smart people not understanding, in their relentless quest to placate the right wing gun fetish, where a test as mushy and meaningless as the historical analogue test would take them. Arguments yesterday demonstrated that the Court's gun rights majority really had no idea what Bruen would mean in the lower federal courts...because the Court had no idea that the test would be so sophomoric and, as it happens, tragic to any effort to curtail gun deaths and domestic violence.
Roger Taney was a bigot of his time. And Dred Scott was a disgrace and everlasting stain on the country. But the Roberts Court is doing more personal and institutional damage to the governance, the structure and functions of government, and to the citizenry than even Taney's Court.
If owning/using a firearm while using/under influence of illegal substances is found to be unconstitutional, would that ruling be retroactive to cases like Hunter Biden's?
This court has egregiously ruled against precedent in several major cases - often in ways I completely disagree with.
But Bruen (and particularly Bruen + Rahimi) takes the cake in terms of absolutely stupid decisions. Suddenly judges are expected to do the work of American History grad students and, as noted in this excellent writeup, without the benefit of either Congress's words or (assumed) intents - a strange leg to stand on for the originalist/textualist wing of the court.
In the words of the late justice Scalia (words that everyone assume pointed at justice Thomas) "I'm an originalist, but I'm not a nut"
Bruen compounds bad “history” with bad theory and it would be better to simply bury it as wrongly decided as well as unworkable.
More making it up as they go along to justify whatever they want to justify. Exactly as described by Sotamayor
Sounds to me like a law created specifically for arbitrary and capricious enforcement.
Yes
How many law firms that 😱 surrendered to trump like Paul Weiss, had CEOs in the epstein 📁s?
Excellent and informative. Thanks for sharing the news we all need to know !
I must confess a deep sense of satisfaction in seeing how the mighty (large law firms pretending to be in favor of liberal values) have fallen. Not that I wouldn't welcome them back into the fold if they would go out and do some important pro bono work.
The Law Firm Executive Orders: Brad Karp's and Paul Weiss's ignominy is completed by the DOJ's withdrawal of any defense of the Law Firm EOs. The lesson is as simple as this: Paul Weiss capitulated and emboldened a bullying administration bent on demanding compliance with government orthodoxy -- a mockery of the First Amendment and to the notion that big law firms act independently on behalf of clients, without fear of government opposition. Karp and Paul Weiss are case studies in venal defeatism, even when the principles on the table are among the most important to the polity and profession. Just an absolute disgrace.
The Continued Saga of the Bungled Second Amendment. This saga began with the outcome determinative faux history provided by Scalia in Heller, which at least made room for reasonable time, place, type and manner restrictions on gun usage, ownership and location. Bruen is a story of seemingly smart people not understanding, in their relentless quest to placate the right wing gun fetish, where a test as mushy and meaningless as the historical analogue test would take them. Arguments yesterday demonstrated that the Court's gun rights majority really had no idea what Bruen would mean in the lower federal courts...because the Court had no idea that the test would be so sophomoric and, as it happens, tragic to any effort to curtail gun deaths and domestic violence.
Roger Taney was a bigot of his time. And Dred Scott was a disgrace and everlasting stain on the country. But the Roberts Court is doing more personal and institutional damage to the governance, the structure and functions of government, and to the citizenry than even Taney's Court.
If owning/using a firearm while using/under influence of illegal substances is found to be unconstitutional, would that ruling be retroactive to cases like Hunter Biden's?
Thank you for a clear explanation of a steaming pile of legal excrement.