Quote of the Day
But the Constitution, by design, recognizes that some rights are so important and sacrosanct that nothing short of a constitutional amendment may take them away. No one—not a federal judge, not a state governor or legislator, not even the President of the United States—is above the Constitution.
Nevertheless, California recently passed a law, Senate Bill 2, that limits the public places where people with concealed carry permits may carry their handguns to defend themselves and their families. To obtain such a permit in California, a person must go through a rigorous screening process. The process includes a lengthy application, a thorough background check involving interviews, fingerprinting, and reviewing multiple government databases, and a full-day, hands-on training course in which the person must demonstrate they can safely and proficiently use the handgun they seek to carry in public. Even with those stringent requirements, California will not allow concealed carry permitholders to effectively practice what the Second Amendment promises. SB2’s coverage is sweeping, repugnant to the Second Amendment, and openly defiant of the Supreme Court.
Cormac J. Carney
United States District Judge
December 20, 2023
Reno May, et al. v. Robert Bonta
And
Marco Antonio Carralero, et al. v. Robert Bonta
Case Nos.: SACV 23-01696-CJC (ADSx) SACV 23-01798-CJC (ADSx)
There are lots of strong words in this opinion. I hope they stand up to the almost certain attack of the appeals court.
My request to Bing Chat for an image was:
Please create an image of a federal judge telling the attorney general California law is repugnant to the Second Amendment, and openly defiant of the Supreme Court.
I suspect there is some bias in the AI:
“But the Constitution, by design, recognizes that some rights are so important and sacrosanct that nothing short of a constitutional amendment may take them away.”
1A.) Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
How could congress write and pass an amendment under those conditions? Unless your communist and want to say a law is different than an amendment? But I digress.
I would posit that our forefathers believed certain rights were so sacrosanct that they took them completely off the table for government, period.
Thus the wording “Shall not be infringed”. Instead of “Maybe, with an amendment”.
The problem as I see it is we all bought in the communist programming that government can and should be all powerful.
Nothing could be farther from the truth.
Government belongs in the box, locked up and tide down. And anyone in government that tries to crawl outside it needs to be made an example of.
Tared, feathered, horsewhipped, hung. Or ran out of town on a rail. If my history serves.
Instead were being invaded, said invasion being charged to our, and our children’s credit cards. By people thinking their above the constitution. A fine joke, if your satan.
When will it be our turn to say; Never again?
Years ago.