We're pleased to announce an update is coming to the community boards.
Sunday, September 25th: We are migrating the boards to a new platform. The site is currently in read-only mode and we will bring it back online as soon as the migration is complete.
“In a new approach to gun control inspired by Texas’s controversial approach to banning most abortions, California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Saturday announced that his administration will work to make it easier for private citizens to sue people who sell assault rifles and parts for untraceable ghost guns,” the San Francisco Chronicle reports.“State officials will aim to craft a measure that would allow residents to seek damages of at least $10,000, plus legal fees, against anyone who manufactures, distributes or sells an assault weapon or ghost gun kit in California.”Said Newsom: “If states can now shield their laws from review by the federal courts that compare assault weapons to Swiss Army knives, then California will use that authority to protect people’s lives, where Texas used it to put women in harm’s way.”https://politicalwire.com/2021/12/12/newsom-models-new-gun-l...from the comments:- Roberts...says he calls balls and strikes but decided that racism doesn’t exist anymore, that corporations are people and that religion is a good excuse for disobeying the law. He just gives cover to the extremists on the court, but in his heart he is one, too.- If they strike down the California law but leave Texas's intact it adds fuel to the fire to reform and nueter the court via term limits.If they allow both laws to stand you'll see bipartisan calls for court reform, and might even see the possibility of a reasonable consensus because--surprise--a country where an [redacted] can sue you for exercising a constitutional right they don't like isn't really free in any meaningful sense, and your rights, such as they are, only extend as far as you can afford to defend them.The only way that they could "out maneuver" the people who want to take away their power (i.e. have an outcome that doesn't add fuel to the fire for adverse consequences for the court, long term,) would be to strike down both laws. Or, in simpler terms, do their jobs correctly.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |