Supreme Court case to legalize assault weapons in all 50 states

A case on the Supreme Court’s “shadow docket” could strike down state and local bans on AR-15s and similar assault weapons, favorite firearms of mass murderers. The plaintiff, the National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR), is basically the NRA on meth.

“The case challenges a Naperville, Illinois, ordinance and a similar Illinois state law, both of which ban assault weapons, which the state law defines to include certain semiautomatic rifles such as AR-15s and AK-47s. Additionally, the state law prohibits the sale of a “large capacity ammunition feeding device,” which the statute defines as long gun magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, or handgun magazines that hold more than 15 bullets.”

— “A new Supreme Court case seeks to legalize assault weapons in all 50 states,” Ian Millhiser, Vox

__________________
Short link: 

Image (“Old Glory”) by Mike Licht. Download a copy here. Creative Commons license; credit Mike Licht, NotionsCapital.com

Comments are welcome if they are on-topic, substantive, concise, and not boring or obscene. Comments may be edited for clarity and length.

Clarence Thomas Family Value$

As an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, Clarence Thomas makes a measly $230,000 a year, so naturally he needs all the financial help he can get. And he gets lots of it, chiefly from his billionaire pal Harlan Crow, friend of the Court and renowned collector of Nazi memorabilia. A true believer in family values, Mr. Crow:

Paid the $120,000 salary of Mrs. Ginni Thomas and propped up her far-right Liberty Central lobby;

Paid Justice Thomas for his elderly mother’s house, fixed it up, and allowed her to live there rent-free; and

Paid the private school tuition of Mr. Thomas’s legal ward, his grandnephew Mark Martin.

Justice Thomas didn’t disclose any of this to the Court in his required annual financial disclosure reports. He also didn’t reveal his trips on Harlan Crow’s private jet or megayacht or their luxury vacation excursions.

Most of these issues were uncovered bythe non-profit ProPublica newsroom and the New York Times.

More:

“A brief timeline of Clarence Thomas, Harlan Crow and ethics questions,” Aaron Blake, Washington Post

“Billionaire Offered Tuition to Send Ginni Thomas to Law School for Second Time,” Andy Borowitz, The New Yorker

Related:

“Clarence Thomas has for years claimed income from a defunct real estate firm,” Shawn Boburg and Emma Brown, Washington Post

“More ethics questions rise for Supreme Court justices,” Sareen Habeshian, Axios

“Judicial activist directed fees to Clarence Thomas’s wife, urged ‘no mention of Ginni,’” Emma Brown, Shawn Boburg and Jonathan O’Connell, Washington Post

The real reason for the Supreme Court’s corruption crisis,” Ian Millhiser, Vox

Updates:

“CREW files civil and criminal complaint against Clarence Thomas,” Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) [Read the complaint]

“Clarence Thomas Promises To Adopt Code Of Ethics For The Right Price,” The Onion

“Thomas’ Monsanto years offer window into justice’s enviro roots,” Pamela King, E&E News

“The strange story of Clarence and Ginni Thomas,” Lauren Mechling, The Guardian

___________________________
Short Link: https://wp.me/p6sb6-DsG

Image by Mike Licht. Download a copy here. Creative Commons license; credit Mike Licht, NotionsCapital.com

Comments are welcome if they are on-topic, substantive, concise, and not boring or obscene. Comments may be edited for clarity and length.

Warren Burger on ‘2nd Amendment Fraud’

In 1991, conservative former Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger said the idea that there was an individual right to bear arms was “a fraud”:

“This has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word ‘fraud,’ on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime. Now just look at those words. There are only three lines in that amendment. “A well regulated militia”—of the militia, which was going to be the state army, was going to be well-regulated, why shouldn’t 16 and 17 and 18 or any other age persons be regulated in the use or arms the way an automobile is regulated?”

More:

“How the NRA Rewrote the Second Amendment,” Michael Waldman, Politico

“Not So Long Ago, the Second Amendment Didn’t Guarantee the Right to Own a Gun,” Ed Kilgore, New York Magazine

______________

Short link: https://wp.me/p6sb6-rrs

Comments are welcome if they are on-topic, substantive, concise, and not boring or obscene. Comments may be edited for clarity and length.

Kavanaugh Asserts Constitutional Right to Steak

US Supreme Court Associate Justice Brett “I Like Beer” Kavanaugh was eating at Morton’s steakhouse in DC on July 6th when womens’ rights activists found out, and protested in front of the pricey eatery. Mr. Kavanaugh had to sneak out the back without dessert. Sad, but there’s always Grubhub.

Morton’s angrily responded that “Politics … should not trample the freedom … of the right to … eat dinner.” Protesters reponded by flooding Morton’s with fake reservations by phone and on Open Table.

There were other reactions. “Sounds like he just wanted some privacy to make his own dining decisions,” Chasten Buttigieg tweeted, alluding to Kavanaugh’s vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, the decision that guaranteed abortion access on the basis of Americans’ right to privacy. And after Fox News’ Peter Doocy asked if “These justices … have no right to privacy?”, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez tweeted “Pretty sure they overturned that right 2 weeks ago Doocy.”

More:

“Brett Kavanaugh is the latest target of protests at D.C. restaurants,” Emily Heil and Tim Carman, Washington Post

“‘Let him eat cake’: AOC reacts to Kavanaugh being forced out of restaurant by abortion rights protesters,” Axios

“Sorry, but the Constitution contains no right to eat dinner,” Washington Post

“Group offers up to $250 for SCOTUS justices sightings after Kavanaugh protest,” Axios

“Protests of Public Officials in Restaurants Aren’t Going Away,” Jessica Sidman, Washingtonian

________________
Short link: https://wp.me/p6sb6-zy6

Image by Mike Licht. Download a copy here. Creative Commons license; credit Mike Licht, NotionsCapital.com

Comments are welcome if they are on-topic, substantive, concise, and not boring or obscene. Comments may be edited for clarity and length.

 

Supreme Court Requires Blood Sacrifice

The Supreme Court of the United States thinks you should be able to carry a concealed handgun in public just because you think it’s cool and want to feel like a big shot. For over a century, New York had required gun owners to have a reason to carry a concealed weapon. Police issued concealed carry permits to business owners who carry bags of cash to a bank’s night deposit facility, those who had a demonstrable proper cause to be concerned for their personal safety, and so on. Now any dumb schmuck who hasn’t been caught committing a crime — yet — will be enabled to do so, with deadly consequences, thanks to six SCOTUS conservative ideologues. That doesn’t sound like a “well-regulated militia” to us.

What can you expect?

• More gunshot deaths, murders and suicides.
• More civilians killed by police, who will be more likely to assume that anyone they come into contact with is armed with a concealed deadly weapon.

More:

“Supreme Court strikes down New York’s concealed carry gun law,” Oriana Gonzalez, Axios

“U.S. Supreme Court expands gun rights, strikes down New York law,” Andrew Chung and Lawrence Hurley, Reuters

“Supreme Court strikes N.Y. law, finds right to carry guns outside home,” Robert Barnes and Ann E. Marimow, Washington Post

“SCOTUS Strikes Down New York Gun Control Law, Expanding Gun Rights In Wake Of Mass Shootings,” Kate Riga, Talking Points Memo 

 

________________________
Short Link: https://wp.me/p6sb6-zbv

Image (“Blood Sacrifice”) by Mike Licht. Download a copy here. Creative Commons license; credit Mike Licht, NotionsCapital.com

Comments are welcome if they are on-topic, substantive, concise, and not boring or obscene. Comments may be edited for clarity and length.

Fences Up at the Supreme Court

After the recent leak of Samuel Alito’s draft decision, the Supreme Court Building was surrounded by security fencing to prevent the Justices from breaking out and inflicting further damage.

_________________________
Short link: https://wp.me/p6sb6-yZ3

Photo by Victoria Pickering via Flickr (CC 2.0 license).

Comments are welcome if they are on-topic, substantive, concise, and not boring or obscene. Comments may be edited for clarity and length.

 

The Supreme Court Leaks All the Time

Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts is shocked – shocked! — that a draft of the impending ruling on a Mississippi abortion case has been leaked to the press. Conservatives are calling the leak an act of treasonous insurrection, a subject they certainly know lots about.

Fact is, the leak is by no means unprecendented. Even the Roe decision, which this court seems bent on negating, was leaked. Warren Burger, then Chief Justice, demanded to know who had leaked the information and threatened to give all the Court’s clerks lie-detector tests:

“Clerks, justices, and other people with access to information have leaked about Bush v. Gore, the Affordable Healthcare Act, and—now—the overturning of Roe, just as in the 19th century, the court leaked information about its ruling in the Pennsylvania v. Wheeling and Belmont Bridge Company case. …. Despite all the Court’s august solemnity, full-time reporters covering it are able to break news about it and its inner workings—including, at times, in highly-detailed behind-the-scenes books—because people up to and including the justices leak.”

— “The Supreme Court Leaks All the Time,” Matthew Gault, Vice [links added]

Related:

“Newsmax Host Suggests Ketanji Brown Jackson, Who Isn’t On Supreme Court Yet, Leaked Draft,”
Elise Foley, HuffPost

_______________
Short link: https://wp.me/p6sb6-yYx

Top: Official US Supreme Court photo

Comments are welcome if they are on-topic, substantive, concise, and not boring or obscene. Comments may be edited for clarity and length.

 

Supreme Court May Dunk on NCAA

The Supreme Court will begin hearing cases again on October 4th, the first Monday in October, while 2021 NCAA fall sports seasons are well under way. A spring SCOTUS opinion by Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh suggests the court and the “amateur sports” monopoly may have a showdown before June.

“Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate on the theory that their product is defined by not paying their workers a fair market rate,” Kavanaugh wrote. “And under ordinary principles of antitrust law, it is not evident why college sports should be any different. The NCAA is not above the law.”

More:

How US college sport became an $8bn inequity racket. And why it may fall,” Bryan Armen Graham, The Guardian

________________

Short link: https://wp.me/p6sb6-xpM

Top image by Mike Licht. Download a copy here. Creative Commons license; credit Mike Licht, NotionsCapital.com

Comments are welcome if they are on-topic, substantive, concise, and not boring or obscene. Comments may be edited for clarity and length.

 

How should we interpret the Second Amendment?

How should we interpret the 2nd Amendment? If only Antonin Scalia had not been on his high school rifle team …. A Washington Post video by Daron Taylor and Joyce Koh.

_____________
Short link: https://wp.me/p6sb6-wnH

Comments are welcome if they are on-topic, substantive, concise, and not boring or obscene. Comments may be edited for clarity and length.

 

‘Rona Religion: Supreme Court Upholds Human Sacrifice

On the Wednesday before Thanksgiving, in the dark of night, the Supreme Court decided that during the Coronavirus pandemic, which has killed over 260,000 Americans, places of worship are free to pack the house in sabbath superspreading events. The deciding vote was by Trump appointee and cult member Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who must have a fondness for the traditional Requiem Mass. You may recall that the president’s Rose Garden “reveal party” for Mrs. Barrett’s SCOTUS nomination was itself a superspreading event.

More:

“Supreme Court’s conservatives reject COVID restrictions on New York houses of worship,” David G. Savage, Los Angeles Times

“Justices lift New York’s COVID-related attendance limits on worship services,” Amy Howe, SCOTUS Blog

“Supreme Court backs religious groups on New York coronavirus restrictions,” Rebecca Falconer, Axios

“Major shift at Supreme Court on Covid-19 orders,” Josh Gerstein, Politico

“In Covid-19 regulations case, Sotomayor dissent claps back at Supreme Court majority,” Raul A. Reyes, NBC News

Updates:

“Pastor of California Megachurch That Defied Lockdown Order Dies of COVID-19,” Rachel Olding, Daily Beast

“Supreme Court sides with California church protesting coronavirus restrictions,” Robert Barnes, Washington Post

“Brooklyn diocese cheers ruling barring Cuomo’s houses of worship limits,” Lia Eustachewich, New York Post

____________________________
Short link: https://wp.me/p6sb6-w8z

Image by Mike Licht. Download a copy here. Creative Commons license; credit Mike Licht, NotionsCapital.com

Comments are welcome if they are on-topic, substantive, concise, and not obscene. Comments may be edited for clarity and length.