Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And neither the MS nor TX laws ban all abortions. As such, if CA can restrict 2nd Amendment Rights, then MS, TX, and any other state can restrict any perceived right to abortion.
CA isn't banning all guns and Texas isn't banning all abortions, any state can take away a constitutional right with the bounty system which removes government. We will see if the supreme court will treat California differently if this gets through the legislature.
The supreme court doesn't take issue with the Texas law, it would be hypocritical to react to California.
This is exactly as predicted by John Roberts when they refused to do anything about Texas.
CA isn't banning all guns and Texas isn't banning all abortions, any state can take away a constitutional right with the bounty system which removes government. We will see if the supreme court will treat California differently if this gets through the legislature.
Since the laws are not equal, I suspect SCOTUS will view them differently. The TX law applies to killing another human life. The CA law does not. BIG difference.
Like I said, as abortion involves death, i.e., the deliberate killing of another human life, it would make more sense if Newsom made his proposed "bounty" law apply to those who used a gun to deliberately kill another human, except in the case of justifiable self-defense. I doubt anyone would object to that.
Newsom could pass a law that allows 3rd party to sue California gun dealers for $10k maybe even dealers who sell AR-15 parts. Since your required to go though a FFL located in state those dealers will just go out of business after a few are sued. Why would you invest money in a business that has risk like that. It effectively bans guns in the state if there is no dealers there.
Newsom could pass a law that allows 3rd party to sue California gun dealers for $10k maybe even dealers who sell AR-15 parts. Since your required to go though a FFL located in state those dealers will just go out of business after a few are sued. Why would you invest money in a business that has risk like that. It effectively bans guns in the state if there is no dealers there.
Exactly.
This is using federal hijinks against the people, and the federal government will be tied up in a knot of their own making because they violate the Constitution all the time by using taxes or commerce. So Newsom would be following suit really, and what can they possibly do about it, given the countless Constitutional abuses hiding inside just interstate commerce alone?
We'll see if Newsom and his Dem state legislature are that smart. If they are, I'll despise them for tyranny, but will giggle at them jamming the fed.gov's own hijinks up their arse.
"it was clear that Justices Alito, and Gorsuch understood this would likely happen if the Texas law was successful at its intent."
"it was clear". Is this YOUR claim or what someone else stated?
"I expect" I expect Santa to bring me toys for Christmas!
"it is literally a legal way to intimidate people into giving up constitutional rights"
Exactly which "rights"?
Those justices literally asked the question about 2-3 times each. Check the audio or transcripts for yourself. If you check then you will also understand the context and what specifically the Justices and both counsels were discussing or questioned in relation to the "Slippery slope" and "Chilling effect".
This is using federal hijinks against the people, and the federal government will be tied up in a knot of their own making because they violate the Constitution all the time by using taxes or commerce. So Newsom would be following suit really, and what can they possibly do about it, given the countless Constitutional abuses hiding inside just interstate commerce alone?
We'll see if Newsom and his Dem state legislature are that smart. If they are, I'll despise them for tyranny, but will giggle at them jamming the fed.gov's own hijinks up their arse.
Newsom talked about 3rd parties suing gun manufactures I'm sure there are none left in California he is taking about a California resident filing a lawsuit against an out of state gun manufacture.
I wonder if Californian's would agree with total ban still lot of gun owners even if you remove semi-autos.
14% of Californians own guns which is 4.2 million that's lot of voters.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
