Your Traitorous Supreme Court
BY Herschel Smith
1 month, 2 weeks ago
If carry can be banned in a place because it is busy, enclosed, or hard to exit, the list of so-called sensitive places will never stop growing. Today, it is buses and trains. Tomorrow, it is train stations, public parks, entertainment districts, events, and any other place politicians decide feel is too populated for ordinary citizens to exercise a right. That is exactly the kind of interest balancing that Bruen was supposed to stop.
And to date, not a single AR ban case has been granted certiorari.
That of course means that Ms. Amy Coney Barrett, whom professor Mark Smith loves so much, believes in gun control, just like chief justice Ms. Roberts (and presumably Kavanaugh and Gorsuch).
So much for the fine list of justices named by Trump. Great recommendations from the federalist society, or whomever.
On April 6, 2026 at 7:51 pm, Dan said:
I doubt even 1% of the criminals in black robes actually believe in and support 2A rights. The system that creates lawyers is completely corrupt and controlled by the communist left. It’s almost impossible to have a career as a judge who supports the Second. The system identifies and filters out such beliefs before you can achieve any success.
On April 6, 2026 at 11:23 pm, Stan Back said:
All of government is quisling traitors in service to foreigners.
CPUSA (D) or Grand Old Politburo (R).
This includes SCOTUS.
On April 7, 2026 at 2:16 am, Plague Monk said:
And yet, far too many of the gun writers are STILL saying we have to vote Rethrug because the Demonrats are will bw SO much worse…
I voted for Flump based on Elon Musk’s endorsement, but that is the last time I will vote for any Rethug, especially with this insane war.
Time to bring the woodchippers out; mhangfing is too good for most of our “leaders”.
On April 7, 2026 at 11:17 am, X said:
Yep. After the Bruen decision, New York became “shall issue” — then made it a felony to carry in 99% of the state in both public and private places, even with a permit.
The 2nd Circuit partially reversed this, but only partially. New York gun owners now have far LESS legal ability to carry than they did before they “won” the Bruen decision. Worse, before Bruen, violating carry restrictions listed on a permit was typically not a crime at all or even a violation. Now it is a FELONY.
It is my belief that the courts are mostly a flim-flam designed to bamboozle the rubes into thinking they might have a chance to “win” and thus incentivizing them to play along with The System. In reality you will get screwed by the courts after exhausting your time and money and hope.
Remember, courts are government agencies staffed by political “elites.” It’s unreasonable to believe that they will side with the peasants their class disdains.
On April 12, 2026 at 4:59 pm, kevin said:
Men should not petition for rights but take them.
also
Any man that waits for a court to affirm his rights has already forfeited them.
On April 30, 2026 at 2:37 pm, Archer said:
It takes four Justices to vote in favor of granting cert for SCOTUS to take a case.
Despite the “Republican 6-3 majority,” we have two: Thomas and Alito.
Pro-2A cases should be steam-rolling anti-2A arguments left and right. Instead, we’re lucky to get one a year, and usually some fringe question that’s so far removed from the core right that most of us will never encounter it.
Even Bruen — for all it’s touted as a “landmark case significantly broadening 2A rights,” it only struck down a couple of New York City’s most egregious laws that made it “technically” illegal to transport firearms to a range outside the city and back. Most of us don’t live in New York City and were never subject to those laws; they never affected us, so being struck down isn’t a game-changer for most of the country’s gun owners. Yeah, the “text, history, and tradition” part is a win, but not a novel idea; it’s basically a reassertion of Heller, and lower courts are still finding ways around it, just like they did the first time.
Sorry, but in my mind Bruen never should have been necessary; it only was because the lower courts refused to abide by Heller (and still do) and openly defied SCOTUS on that precedent — which itself should never have been necessary, and shame on SCOTUS for not holding lower judges in contempt and imposing sanctions for doing exactly the opposite of what SCOTUS ordered.
TL;DR: If we’re only going to get ONE 2nd Amendment case per year before SCOTUS, I’d MUCH prefer getting some real victories rather than constantly having to re-tread ground we already won.