All CATEGORIES
☰ Menu
All Da King's Men

Supreme Court Overturns Gun Ban Despite Outlaw Judges

By Da King Published: June 29, 2010

The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads as follows:

"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."

The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Under that law, the citizens of the United States have the right to own guns. In it's McDonald v. City of Chicago ruling, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that core Constitutional right.

Pretty straightforward ruling. How can there by any other ruling ? The Second Amendment says what it says. Gun ownership is a RIGHT. The Supreme Court should have ruled unanimously in this case.

But of course, the ruling was not unanimous. There were four judicial activists on the Supreme Court who ignored the Constitution and voted against the right of gun ownership. Anybody want to guess who those four were ??? Anyone ? Anyone ?

Just kidding. We all know who they were. From the Washington Post:

The Second Amendment provides Americans a fundamental right to bear arms that cannot be violated by state and local governments, the Supreme Court ruled Monday in a long-sought victory for gun rights advocates.

The court's gun decision in McDonald v. Chicago divided the nine justices just as the Heller case had done almost exactly two years earlier. Roberts and Alito were in the majority with Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. [John Paul] Stevens and [Ruth Bader] Ginsburg dissented, along with Justices Stephen G. Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor, who was marking her first term replacing David H. Souter.

Four justices willfully ignored the Constitution of the United States. That's really all there is to it.

Article 6 of the Constitution, titled "Debts, Supremacy, Oaths," contains the following:

"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

Under Title 28, Chapter I, Part 453 of the United States Code, each Supreme Court Justice takes the following oath:

"I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [TITLE] under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God."

Yet, and I repeat, four justices (Ginsburg, Stevens, Breyer, and Sotomayor), willfully violated their oath to uphold the Constitution. They threw the Constitution out the window and voted instead for their partisan political leanings. The end.

Now, I don't care whether you like guns or you hate guns. I'm not too fond of them. I don't hunt. I believe I have the right to protect myself, but I don't care about my opinion on gun ownership, just like I don't care about your opinion, because none of our opinions matter. They don't matter because gun ownership IS A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. The only way to change that should be via a Constitutional Amendment. The way to change it is not to place outlaw Justices on the Supreme Court who will ignore the law of the land and trash the Bill Of Rights because they feel like it.

We the people need a way to boot these outlaw Justices off the Court. They are appointed for life. Therefore, they can rule however they want, the Constitution be damned. That undermines the very concept of Constitutional government and turns it into a partisan political football. Our rights can be kicked around and tossed away at any time, based upon the judgement of five people. Five UNELECTED people.

There is only one way to remove a Supreme Court Justice, and that is through impeachment. Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution says:

"The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

Would willfully violating the highest law in the land be considered "high crimes and misdemeanors" ? It sure should be, but there has only been one impeachment proceeding against a Supreme Court Justice, and that happened in 1805. That Justice was Samuel Chase, who had proceedings brought against him for...drumroll please...allegedly letting his partisan leanings affect his court decisions. Chase was acquitted, but there is precedent to getting these Constitution tramplers off the Court, as we should.

So why don't we DO IT, and stop all this judicial tampering with our Constitution ? The Justices are replaceable. The Constitution stands between us and tyranny. Bye, bye, Ginsburg. Bye, bye, Breyer. Bye bye, Stephens, and bye, bye, Sotomayor, we hardly knew ye. Good riddance. First you all ruled against the First Amendment in the Citizens United case, and now you ruled against the Second Amendment in the Chicago case. You're a bunch of criminals. Organized crime. Get outta here, and don't let the door hit your unconstitutional partisan-agenda backsides on the way out.

We even have Supreme Court nominees lying to the Senate Judiciary Committee during sworn testimony. As an example, look at Sonia Sotomayor, who said the following during her confirmation hearings:

“Like you, I understand that how important the right to bear arms is to many, many Americans. In fact, one of my godchildren is a member of the NRA. And I have friends who hunt. I understand the individual right fully that the Supreme Court recognized in Heller.”

Heller supported the individual right to keep firearms for self-defense.

But what did she say in the McDonald v. Chicago case ? Something completely different:

“I Can Find Nothing In The Second Amendment’s Text, History, Or Underlying Rationale That Could Warrant Characterizing It As ‘Fundamental’ Insofar As It Seeks To Protect The Keeping And Bearing Of Arms For Private Self-Defense Purposes.”

Sotomayor voted to uphold the gun ban. Isn't lying to Congress a crime ?

Print
Add This

SUBSCRIBE VIA RSS

OHIO.COM VIDEOS

About This Blog

Prev Next