Welcome to Incremental Social! Learn more about this project here!
Check out lemmyverse to find more communities to join from here!

heidilifeldman , to Random
@heidilifeldman@mastodon.social avatar

According to the Court nothing in created an unbounded right to keep handguns in the home and nothing in disturbs the government's authority to regulate firearms possession by those who have been found to pose a credible threat to the physical safety of others. 7/

heidilifeldman OP ,
@heidilifeldman@mastodon.social avatar

On to the concurrence by and joined by . Sotomoayor emphasizes that she still maintains was wrongly decided. But, even under Bruen, is an easy case - prohibiting adjudicated domestic abusers from possessing guns is, under any sense of analogical reasoning, analogical to historical laws regulating firearms possession and use. tries to argue that any difference between historical and today's laws makes them disanalogous. That's ridiculous. 12/

heidilifeldman OP ,
@heidilifeldman@mastodon.social avatar

Great passage from : "Under [] approach, the legislatures of today would be limited not by a distant generation’s determination that such a law was unconstitutional, but by a distant generation’s failure to consider that such a law might be necessary. ... 13/

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • incremental_games
  • random
  • meta
  • All magazines