• Trump SCOTUS Nominee: ‘2nd Amendment Protects an Individual’s Right’



    By AWR Hawkins

    President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court of the United States is Neil Gorsuch, a judge on the United State Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit who has written that “the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right.”

    Gorsuch wrote this in the opinion for United States v. Games-Perez. A facts page summarizing Gorsuch’s positions contains his full statement, which says the Supreme Court has held that “the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to own firearms and may not be infringed lightly.”

    He also wrote that there is “a long tradition of widespread gun ownership by private individuals in this country.”

    Read full story here: http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...ividual-right/
    Comments 11 Comments
    1. Horrible's Avatar
      Horrible -
      Was hoping for Hardiman, but as long as Gorsuch defends 2A like the NRA believes he will (and doesn't become some sort of Fudd) and doesn't stab everyone in the back like CJ Roberts did on Obamacare, I am happy!
    1. BaldAssCat's Avatar
      BaldAssCat -
      I don't like the qualifier "lightly", but better than we would have had last year. “the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to own firearms and may not be infringed lightly.”
    1. Golddiggie's Avatar
      Golddiggie -
      Quote Originally Posted by BaldAssCat View Post
      I don't like the qualifier "lightly", but better than we would have had last year. “the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to own firearms and may not be infringed lightly.”
      He should have replaced "lightly" with "ever"...
    1. robjax's Avatar
      robjax -
      "and may not be infringed lightly."

      We're effed.
    1. Horrible's Avatar
      Horrible -
      Quote Originally Posted by robjax View Post
      "and may not be infringed lightly."

      We're effed.
      This is my fear.
    1. white feather's Avatar
      white feather -
      Damn autocorrect... fixed it:

      Quote Originally Posted by robjax View Post
      "and may not be infringed even slightly."
    1. Freddy B's Avatar
      Freddy B -
      Quote Originally Posted by Horrible View Post
      doesn't stab everyone in the back like CJ Roberts did on Obamacare
      I was angry about what Roberts did as well, but now wonder if he was thinking several moves ahead, and actually did conservatives a favor. Would we now control both the executive and legislative branches if Roberts ruled against Obamacare?
    1. ISOTOX's Avatar
      ISOTOX -
      Quote Originally Posted by robjax View Post
      "and may not be infringed lightly."

      We're effed.
      Ya that part bothered me as well.... Anything less that Shall not be infringed means more tyranny to me and more perversion of the constitution.
    1. fencer's Avatar
      fencer -
      Quote Originally Posted by Freddy B View Post
      I was angry about what Roberts did as well, but now wonder if he was thinking several moves ahead, and actually did conservatives a favor. Would we now control both the executive and legislative branches if Roberts ruled against Obamacare?
      I think you give him FAR to much credit.
    1. mibro's Avatar
      mibro -
      Quote Originally Posted by fencer View Post
      I think you give him FAR too much credit.
      Yup. The deep state has the dirt on Roberts imho.

      Attachment 191608
    1. TLB's Avatar
      TLB -
      Quote Originally Posted by BaldAssCat View Post
      I don't like the qualifier "lightly", but better than we would have had last year. “the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to own firearms and may not be infringed lightly.”
      That was Scalia's view as well, IIRC.
  • Visit our sponsors