Gun Owners Were Blindsided By This Supreme Court Decision

In the landmark 2008 Heller case, the Supreme Court held that gun ownership was an individual right.

But that has not stopped local governments from banning certain types of firearms.

So conservatives challenged so-called “assault rifle” bans in New York and Connecticut, but were stunned when the Supreme Court handed down their ruling.

The nation’s highest court refused to hear the case and not review a lower-court ruling, leaving the state bans in place.

The Washington Post reports:

Like other laws, Connecticut’s ban includes semiautomatic guns and high-capacity magazines, covers popular weapons such as AR-­15s and AK-­47s, and names more than 180 weapons that cannot be sold.

But the individuals and organizations challenging the law said the state is an “outlier” in banning weapons that are popular and protected in the rest of the country.

“In truth, the odd assortment of firearms Connecticut calls ‘assault weapons’ are mechanically identical to any other semiautomatic firearm — arms that, as no one disputes, are exceedingly common and fully protected by the Second Amendment,” the challengers said in their petition to the court.

Gun rights advocates have urged the court to review such bans, saying that they violate the court’s 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, which said individuals have a right to gun ownership for self-protection.

The Supreme Court may have also refused to hear the case because there are only eight Justices, leaving the possibility of 4-4 decision.

A 4-4 ruling would mean the case gets returned to the lower court, but not carry the weight of precedent.

This ruling underscores the importance of the Presidential election.

Either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will appoint the next Justice who will be the deciding vote on issues like the Second Amendment.

Hillary Clinton has already declared she will appoint Supreme Court Justices who will attack gun rights.

The Washington Free Beacon reports:

“I was proud when my husband took [the National Rifle Association] on, and we were able to ban assault weapons, but he had to put a sunset on so 10 years later. Of course [President George W.] Bush wouldn’t agree to reinstate them,” said Clinton.

“We’ve got to go after this,” Clinton continued. “And here again, the Supreme Court is wrong on the Second Amendment. And I am going to make that case every chance I get.”

Trump has stated that Hillary is the most anti-gun candidate in American history and that her plan is to eliminate the Second Amendment.

The Washington Examiner reports on Trump’s speech to the NRA conference:

Mr. Trump said “it could even be five” judges that the next president will nominate for the high court.

 

“If she gets to appoint her judges, she will as part of it abolish the Second Amendment,” he said.

 

Let us know who you prefer to appoint the next Supreme Court Justice in the comment section.

  • Michael Davis

    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
    Hildebeast (and Democraps in general) wants to rule the world. She thinks that if she disarms the general public, they won’t be able to revolt against her Hitler-like regime. She’s wrong.
    Two words: Timothy McVeigh
    Look at all the destruction he did with fertilizer and fuel oil.
    The second amendment was put in place to keep the government from getting too big for it’s britches…just like Frau Klinton wants to do now.

    • Edgar Longenecker

      Like all juries, govern mental tampering, is, a given; therefore, jury trials, are no less than a con, against Sheepl;e, who bleat, that, government, of, by, and, for, some people, is the best we can do….. Jurists, and, jurors, are preselected, for their concealment of bias, like the wolves, in sheeps clothing, that, the reptilian illiterati, perceive them to be…. To let, a dozen halfwit wordsmiths, rule this country, is, asinine, considering, that, there is no law enforcement, in place, to arrest them, for the asininity, of, the
      ” judgements,” already known, for which, they were, sleazed into place…….. Snidely….. Edgrrr….

  • antiliberal00

    NOTHING should be set by precedent as that is a sure way to propagate bad law. EVERYTHING should be judged based on the constitution and nothing else.

  • Johnny3h

    THE ARTICLE SAYS, “This ruling underscores the importance of the Presidential election.

    Either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will appoint the next Justice
    who will be the deciding vote on issues like the Second Amendment.

    Hillary Clinton has already declared she will appoint Supreme Court Justices who will attack gun rights.”

    For years, the Republicans, especially the extreme right and religious right have been shooting the party, and themselves, in the foot at EVERY election by REFUSING to vote for the GOP nominee because it’s “not THEIR guy.”

    This damned fool action is PRECISELY THE SAME thing as casting a vote for the DIMocrat candidate!!!! In Presidential as well as Congressional elections, this act “gives” the win to the enemy!!!

    THIS TIME, it is IMPERATIVE that ALL non-DIMocrats VOTE for TRUMP as he IS THE ONLY POSSIBLE candidate that can beat hillarymae and the hillbilly.

    Now, as distasteful as it may be, VOTE FOR TRUMP, OR get a Progressive Supreme Court, AND full DIMocrat Executive Department controlled government!!!

    Because LOTS of people [ Republicans, Conservatives, Right-wingers, DIMocrats, Left-wingers, Libertarians, etc., ad infinitum} are FED UP with the non-responsive DIMocrat AND Republican ESTABLISHMENT wings of their parties running the parties, they [collectively], by joining together have demonstrated that they WANT and will vote for TRUMP!!!

    Just like the Congress [IF they wanted to] could over-ride everything obama does, they can do it with Trump, ESPECIALLY since the DIMocrats will go along with it!!!

    • Dianne Bryant

      Totally true Johnny3h

    • Cass Moret

      During the last two elections, I pleaded with those who announced they would not vote because 1. The GOP candidate was not pure enough or 2. They were going to teach the establishment a lesson. Again, I urge those so inclined to realize failure to vote is a vote for Hillary. Do you really want her appointing from 1 to 3 (possibly more) Supreme Court justices? Do you really want her as commander in chief? What does it take to scare the h*** out of you?

  • Dianne Bryant

    I definately want TRUMP as President to choose the next JUSTICES

    • jstsyn

      That would secure our second but Trump in the W.H.? Scary to say the least.

      • Dianne Bryant

        Not as scary as Hillary. No comparison!!!!!!!!!

  • jstsyn

    Write Bernie Sanders in. HRC is the last thing America needs in the White House. She is a liar, thief, and now for the TPP. She’ll go back on anything she says to get votes. She is a disaster America does not need. I’d rather see Trump and I’m not eager for him. Vote for Bernie if you have to write him in, I am.

  • American

    I will say it again, we need term limits for both houses, our Supreme court, federal, and court of appeals.

  • Jan Turner

    One of these days, we are going to discover that the American public has finally become fed-up with the anti-Constitution/anti-Bill of Rights/anti-Americanism of the liberal politicians and that there is suddenly a New Revolution in process. Whether it will be with guns, knives, bows & arrows, or home-made powder and guns made with printers (?) who knows, but I believe you can push the American people just so far and no further. That is, if we don’t have so many illegals and “refugees” here by then that the American people are overwhelmingly outnumbered. Mr. Obama, Hillary, and their ilk simply do not quite understand those of us whose husbands, fathers, sons, cousins, uncles (and now sisters, mothers, aunts) have fought for FREEDOM for the past 400 years. Perhaps history, for the libs, is just something they didn’t like in school. I, for one, have lived a lot of history in my almost 84 years and I grew up in a Texas family that lived, ate, slept Texas history, as well. I am American first, Texan, second (even though I haven’t lived there in 60+ years) and Rebel through and through!!! I grew up with guns, my kids grew up with guns. I have fired one ONCE in my life, but am not afraid of them – they’re simply a tool – a good tool – but if I must, I’ll teach my grandkids that they should learn to shoot bows and arrows!

  • Barrustio

    Bill Maher…conservative???? Yeh right.

    • nj101

      No, but he takes on radical and “moderate” Islam for what they are doing all around the world.

  • Sorry folks…But I personally hold my original Constitution and it’s Bill of Rights to be mine “INTACT” regards of attempts to “Re” define it. The courts and the police may disagree…..As did Hitler’s Gestapo….But we had better defend what we have or we will lose it piece at a time…..
    Somehow we have agreed a while back to “LET” the government “Chip Away” at our Rights….I think it’s time we stood our ground……I guess we’re all “FELONS” if we defend our Constitution…..That’s the way it Is I guess

  • Cathy aka OldTxGal

    Did you guys know that Obama signed an executive order to appoint a Muslim as Supreme Court Justice?

    “We cannot wait for a new President or the Senate Republicans to fill this vacancy left by Scalia, so I have taken it upon myself to do what needed to be done,” Obama told reporters at a press conference today. “Republican Senators believe that it is appropriate not to act on such an important matter, and as I have shown today, I do not agree with that.”

    As usual, Obama takes matters into his own hands.

    http://abcnews.com.co/obama-signs-executive-order-appoints-rashad-hussain-as-supreme-court-justice/

  • Stephen Korup

    When they want to Ban the Ar-15s and the AK-47s because they claim that WE do not need these Weapons to Defend or Protect ourselves ,Of Course we Know that they are All Wrong . The Criminals that We have to Protect ourselves from are Carrying those exact weapons , are we expected to Defend ourselves with just Pistols and Shot guns ,or our 30-06 , and 30-30 rifles . Thats Just Bullshit the General Public Wouldn’t stand a chance of Defense , without the weapons they are trying to Ban and You know that they know what we are saying but Don’t want to Agree with us , because it goes against every Goofy idea they come up with on Gun Control.

  • You all realize that no matter what the SC decisions are… we know who we are and we know what we have to do. Vote your conscience.