"Supreme Court strikes down Trump-era ban on bump stocks on guns"

[kane_magus]

Even the incredibly rare few things that Trump himself managed to do that were, despite himself, actually good things are being struck down by the brazenly corrupt Supreme Court.

*weary fucking goddamned sigh*

"The ban was challenged by a Texas gun store owner..."

Of course this diarrhetic shit spewed forth from Texas: the bloated, tumorous asshole of the United States of America.

---

Also, this: "Clarence Thomas Rejects Bump Stock Ban After Praising Skill Involved In Mass Shooting"

This article from AboveTheLaw.com is kind of a gem.

"I did not have 'you've really got to appreciate the skill involved in mass murder' on my Supreme Court Bingo card."

...

"It's cliche at this point to say The Onion is real life, but this as close to 'Supreme Court Rule Death Penalty Is "Totally Badass"' as it gets."

...

"In any event, the Court's interpretation of this statute is pedantic nonsense. It's like walking into a sci-fi convention and saying 'well ACTUALLY the Enterprise does not travel faster than light because it's standing still while warping space around it.' Alas, Clarence Thomas will not receive the wedgie that this reasoning deserves."

..

"For his part, Sam Alito went out of his way to write a concurrence noting that the whole legislative history and intent and the common sense understanding of the terms of the statute would cover bump stocks, but also 'fuck you.'"

(Also, really, just look at the tremendous, masterful "skill" on display here[1]. That guy was sooooooo "skillful" that he didn't even realize just how "skillful" he was being there, considering he explicitly said "that shot much faster than I anticipated.")

Man... if only Clarence Thomas had just accepted John Oliver's offer and spared us all from such asinine dumbfuckery.

[1] - And, of course, all the ludicrous ammosexuals in the comments under that video are jizzing themselves to be the first to say "bruh you called a magazine a clip which totally discredits anything and everything you say about guns ever."

Comments

[scissorsevered]

this is semi-related I guess, but I'd love to hear your thoughts on the recent Louisiana law that would require the Ten Commandments be displayed in all public school classrooms. Keyword: PUBLIC schools. https://apnews.com/article/louisiana-ten-commandments-displayed-classrooms-571a2447906f7bbd5a166d53db005a62

I'm sure it's gonna get struck down immediately by the supreme court considering they already have a precedent from Engel v. Vitale. This is gonna be really funny.

[kane_magus]

I think the new law is pretty clearly garbage and should be sent to a landfill as soon as possible. Like... obviously that should be what happens, and the sooner the better.

However, I also think that the primary reason the Louisiana GQP passed this new law when they did, i.e. now, is explicitly because they know that the current Supreme Court bench is way more lopsided and RWNJ-friendly than it has been in a while, if ever. They're hoping that when, not if, all the lawsuits that will for certain be filed against the new law reach the SCOTUS, the Court will simply ignore any and all precedent and come up with some ridiculous, bullshit justification for ruling in favor of the new law, in the same way they did with the anti-abortion decision and with the pro-bump stock decision and with all the other horrendous, RWNJ-leaning decisions that they've made (and will continue to make) in the years since McConnell/Trump stacked the SCOTUS with utter clowns.

I'd say, at this point, it's pretty much entirely up in the air as to whether the Supreme Court will make one of their rare few sensible rulings in this case, i.e. by following obvious precedent and immediately striking the law down, or if they will throw all of that out the window and just make the increasingly typical 6-3 ruling in favor of upholding it. Like, I'm not saying the SCOTUS will definitely rule in favor of the new law, but I'm not optimistic that it'll be a slam dunk against it, either. It's kind of a Hail Mary pass on the part of the Louisiana GQP here, but it's not as completely out of left field (to mix basketball, football, and baseball metaphors) as it would have been, say, a decade ago, all things considered.

Basically, it's yet another one of those "I would hope that the SCOTUS makes the clearly correct, sensible decision, for once, rather than the brazenly wrong, boneheaded decision, but they've made so many other brazenly wrong, boneheaded decisions lately that I'm not going to hold my breath" things. I guess I'm just super pessimistic and have nigh non-existent faith in the SCOTUS to ever do the right thing anymore, these days, even when such decisions should be blatantly obvious no-brainers, and it's a pleasant surprise on the more and more rare occasions that they actually do make a sensible decision. I often wonder if there exists a bridge too far for this SCOTUS (more specifically, for the conservative majority of this SCOTUS), as far as making decisions to appease the RWNJ subset of the US population is concerned. Maybe this case of the Louisiana Ten Commandments law is one of those bridges? We'll see, I guess.