Alito Takes a Blow Torch to Liberal Justices’ Dissent

Alito Takes a Blow Torch to Liberal Justices’ Dissent by Katie Pavlich for Town Hall

GNN Note – Finally. Someone stands up for the American people. Thank you, President Trump. / END

On Thursday morning the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to strike down restrictive “may issue” concealed carry laws in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion and explained how the Second Amendment is not a second-class right.

The arguments made by the dissenting justices were wildly irrelevant from the issue of constitutionality and current law, prompting Justice Samuel Alito to file a separate, concurring opinion destroying their claims. He also took issue with their ignorance and arrogance surrounding the facts of lawful gun ownership vs. criminality. (Take a look, bolding is mine)

Much of the dissent seems designed to obscure the specific question that the Court has decided, and therefore it may be helpful to provide a succinct summary of what wehave actually held. In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570 (2008), the Court concluded that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep a handgun in the home for self-defense. Heller found that the Amendment codified a preexisting right and that this right was regarded at the time of the Amendment’s adoption as rooted in “‘the natural right of resistance and self-preservation.’” Id., at 594. “[T]he inherent right of self-defense,” Heller explained, is “central to the Second Amendment right.” Id., at 628. Although Heller concerned the possession of a handgun in the home, the key point that we decided was that “the people,” not just members of the “militia,” have the right to use a firearm to defend themselves. And because many people face a serious risk of lethal violence when they venture outside their homes, the Second Amendment was understood at the time of adoption to apply under those circumstances. 

Continue Reading / Town Hall >>>

Related posts