A gun ban lobby group supported by billionaires, the Seattle-based Gun Liability Coalition, launched a full-scale action to prevent Judge Amy Coney Barrett from going to the U.S. Supreme Court confirm. The hysterical e-mail exploded, and the nominee "confirmed her ruthless and extreme Second Amendment view."
Only one day ago, anti-gunner billionaire Michael Bloomberg (Michael Bloomberg) Everytown posted its own email swipe on Judge Barrett, claiming that " more than 37,000 people told U.S. senators to oppose the confirmation of Amy Connie Barrett (Amy Coney Barrett)… If our U.S. Senator appoints her as a Supreme Court judge, then the NRA and hundreds of gun safety laws will become a dream. All parts of the country will be in danger.” (Originally Bold.) On Thursday, each town claimed that more than 48,000 “gun sensory supporters” had contacted the Senate and demanded that no vote be taken before the inauguration.
Nothing shows the enthusiasm of the gun ban lobby for the second session more clearly than this. In addition to these desperate news, there is no amendment to their fear of lifting the gun ban, and Judge Barrett has been highly praised for his performance in the Senate Judiciary Committee. [Fox News] The hearing has been continuously recorded.
The coalition’s news admits: “We are working harder than ever to oppose Barrett’s nomination, but we know that we must also focus on protecting our progress. This means fighting against electoral leaders who have the guts. Take courageous actions to stop gun violence and work hard to overcome the false challenge of the gun lobby to Initiative 1639."
I-1639 is a gun control initiative adopted by voters in Washington State in 2018. It deprives young people in the 18-20 age group of the right to purchase any semi-automatic rifle. This measure is called "semi-automatic assault rifle." This definition applies to any self-loading rifle, including 0.22 caliber targets and hunting rifles. The National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation, two gun retailers and three individuals in the affected age group have constitutionally challenged this on federal court grounds.
The Alliance took full advantage of Judge Barrett’s objections in [thefollowingcases: Kanter v. Barr Second Amendment, Wisconsin convicted felony Rickey Kanter (Rickey Kanter) ) Argued that his crime should not disqualify him from owning a gun. Kanter pleaded guilty to a mail fraud case in 2011, which was a non-violent felony. He completed his sentence, received compensation, and applied to the Minister of Justice for disability relief to regain his rights to the Second Amendment.
The case can be read here. Judge Barrett's objection begins on page 27. She insisted:
"18 USC if Section 922(g)(1) and Section 941.29(1m) of the Wisconsin State Regulations clearly established a clear prohibition to serve the government in protecting the public from gun violence They will gain a firm foothold. However, it is unconstitutional for them to deprive all felons of their rights (both violent and non-violent). For Kanter, he was convicted of mail fraud. The reason is that he lied that his company’s therapeutic shoe inserts had been approved by Medicare and billed Medicare accordingly. Neither Wisconsin nor the United States introduced sufficient data to show that all non-violent felonies were disarmed, which greatly improved their In the interest of maintaining public safety. They also did not prove that Kanter himself showed violent tendencies. The lack of evidence that he was either classified as dangerous or bears personal danger marks, which made Kanter permanently disqualified from owning firearms, which violated Second Amendment."
The Union email pointed out, "This position almost violates the decision of every Federal Court of Appeals on this issue. If it is not clear… Judge Barrett confirmed that she is the dream of a gun lobby Justice."
The restoration of rights is not unheard of. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives has in the past conducted "disability-free" investigations on nonviolent felonies until funding for the program was cut.
The anti-gun lobbying group's concerns about Barrett's confirmation have come in full. "If Judge Barrett is confirmed, in fact all our progress in gun violence prevention will be threatened."
Translation: In the High Court with a majority in favor of the Second Amendment, Decades of restrictive or even unconstitutional gun control laws may be challenged, and this can be achieved through the confirmation of Judge Barrett.
The strongest evidence shows that when the High Court accepted the challenge of the New York State Rifl’s restrictive requirements, they knew that these laws might fail, triggering constitutional challenges and trying to change New York City’s dominance The pistol transport regulations e and the Pistol Association early last year. In order to prevent the Supreme Court from reviewing the decree, the law was hurriedly changed after the court accepted the case but before a full hearing was held.
The frantic scramble for the demolition of the landmark showed that the city was aware that their gun laws had been violated. Many top gun activists insist that this restriction is restricted until the Supreme Court declares the move unconstitutional.
During the cross-examination on Wednesday, Judge Barrett’s dissent became the focus of controversy because the Democrats tried this approach, which will challenge other restrictive measures at the city, county, or state level nationwide. To make herself look like she wants to be convicted of felons owning guns instead of letting them vote. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) Dick Dubin (D-OH) is here for interrogation.
If Judge Barrett is confirmed by the Supreme Court, whether her existence is due to Donald Trump's victory in November or being won by Democrat Joe Biden (Joe Biden) ) Instead, which may all be an important part of Donald Trump’s legacy. If her presence does open the door for the higher court to consider the Second Amendment, any decision to support and strengthen individual rights, especially the right to be carried at home, or a ruling on the protection of semi-automatic modern sport rifles, will Provide strong evidence for these people.
argued that gun control laws generally violated the right to possess and carry weapons.