243
I'm surprised Alito went with the majority on this one. And a little surprised Kavanaugh did too. I'm also surprised it was an 8-1 ruling.
I'm not at all surprised Thomas was in the minority.
I read Alito was absent again today as well with no reason given. Maybe in his twisted brain if he isn't present it's like he never ruled that way?
If his brain started dribbling out his ears, or something similarly odd and mostly fatal…would they give a reason?
Or should I not get my hopes up?
With any luck, he went to visit Scalia.
Woah! They’re disarming the police???
Thomas, as per usual, is on the wrong side of history. You can almost 100% pick the correct verdict by choosing the opposite of his vote with a very limited number of exceptions. If these were Vegas odds, you’d get rich betting against him with almost no downside.
If that was the case betting against him would give very little return as it'd be seen as a sure thing.
Don’t celebrate just yet. All repubes will have to do is change the definition of domestic abuser so the law will become toothless
Shouldn't take much effort. Domestic abuse is surprisingly easy to get away with.
Just ask the police.
FTP
It's sad that I have to be amazed that they ruled as they did on such an obvious restriction, but I'm grateful they did.
I guess even a broken clock IS right twice a day.
What are the odds that the presidential immunity case will be decided after the first debate?
Unlikely. Debate is on Thursday and they drop big decisions on Fridays.
So how's that going to affect all the police that commit DV all the time?
Depends on if they get convicted or not.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Justice Clarence Thomas, who wrote the 2022 in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen opinion, filed a lone dissent.
“The Court and Government do not point to a single historical law revoking a citizen’s Second Amendment right based on possible interpersonal violence,” Thomas wrote.
A Texas man, Zackey Rahimi, was convicted for violating that law following a series of shootings, including one in which police said he fired into the air at a Whataburger restaurant after a friend’s credit card was declined.
Rahimi’s lawyers claimed that the Supreme Court’s blockbuster decision two years ago meant that the law on domestic violence orders could not be squared with the Constitution.
The New Orleans-based 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals embraced that argument, concluding that a gun ban for people involved in domestic disputes was an “outlier that our ancestors would never have accepted.”
That may be in part because a series of related legal challenges are already queued up for the court, including a question of whether non-violent felons can be denied access to firearms.
The original article contains 773 words, the summary contains 177 words. Saved 77%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2024
243 points (99.6% liked)
politics
19072 readers
1848 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS