Skip to comments.GOA Applauds Call to Action on Judge Sotomayor from NRA's Past President
Posted on 07/01/2009 11:05:36 AM PDT by neverdem
-- All pro-gunners urged to join this critical fight
Monday, June 29, 2009
Gun Owners of America applauds immediate past NRA President Sandy Froman, who stepped up to the plate last week with a call to arms for all NRA members to vigorously oppose the nomination of Judge Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. (See the article below).
GOA has been calling on our members to oppose this nomination since it is clear that Sotomayor is anti-Second Amendment and wants to legislate from the bench.
The official position from current NRA leadership is to take a "wait and see" approach to the Sotomayor nomination which may well allow her to wiggle through and be confirmed.
GOA calls on all pro-gunners across America to urge NRA leadership to join in this critical fight to protect the Constitution -- and especially our gun rights.
-- GOA Vice-Chairman Tim Macy
NRA Members Must Oppose Sotomayor
by Sandy Froman
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Barack Obama's first nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, has a narrow view of the Second Amendment that contradicts the Court's landmark decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. A heated debate has started in the U.S. Senate over her opposition to the right to keep and bear arms. This issue, which has decided the fate of presidential elections, could also decide her nomination. Gun owners, and especially the members of the National Rifle Association, must aggressively oppose Judge Sotomayor's confirmation to the Supreme Court.
On June 24, senators began speaking on the floor of the Senate expressing grave concerns over Judge Sotomayor's Second Amendment record. Senator Jeff Sessions R-AL, the Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, pointed out that although her record on the issue is "fairly scant," she has twice stated that the Second Amendment is not a fundamental right. Senator Sessions also noted that in Second Amendment and other constitutional cases, Sotomayor's analysis of important constitutional issues has been lacking suggesting "a troubling tendency to avoid or casually dismiss difficult Constitutional issues of exceptional importance." Sotomayor's view on the Second Amendment clearly reflects an extreme anti-gun philosophy, and some Democrat senators from pro-gun states are justifiably nervous.
Last year, the Supreme Court held in Heller that the Second Amendment guarantees the right of individual Americans to keep and bear firearms. But that ruling was a fiercely-contested, 5-4 split decision. Justice Kennedy joined the four conservatives on the Court to make the majority, with the four liberal justices writing passionate dissents about how the Second Amendment does not apply to private citizens.
Bluntly speaking, the Second Amendment survived by a single vote. Had one justice voted differently, the Second Amendment would have been erased from the Bill of Rights forever. Today in the Supreme Court, the right to bear arms hangs by a single vote.
The next question the Supreme Court will decide is whether the Second Amendment is a "fundamental right" that applies to cities and states, thus preventing them from restricting gun rights. Even the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held earlier this year in Nordyke v. King that the Second Amendment is a fundamental right, yet Judge Sotomayor disagrees.
When Barack Obama nominated Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, it belied his flowery rhetoric about respecting our constitutional gun rights. Out of almost 200 federal appeals judges in this country, Judge Sotomayor is one of only six to weigh in (after the Heller case) to hold that the Second Amendment only limits federal actions. If your state or city chooses to ban all guns or take away the ones that you already have in your home for hunting and self-defense, Sonia Sotomayor says the Constitution can't help you.
This position becomes all the more radical when it's revealed how she reached this conclusion. Only six judges have denied gun rights against the states. Of these, three did so in a recent Seventh Circuit case, NRA v. Chicago, writing a detailed opinion that the Second Amendment doesn't apply to the states because they thought an old 1800s Supreme Court case tied their hands on the issue, and they commended the case up to the Supreme Court after long and scholarly consideration. Judge Sotomayor and two of her liberal colleagues, however, wrote only a single paragraph on the whole issue when deciding their own New York case, Maloney v. Cuomo. In one paragraph, she said the Second Amendment gives people no rights at all when it comes to state or city laws. She gave no explanation, and made no call for Supreme Court action.
Then we find that this has been a consistent belief for Sotomayor. In a case before her in 2004, she and her colleagues concluded that there is no fundamental right in the Second Amendment but provided no substantive analysis to justify this conclusion. Throughout her career, Judge Sotomayor's record is one of consistent opposition to the private ownership of firearms.
America has almost 90 million gun owners who value their rights. And of these, no one does more to protect the Second Amendment than the four million members of the National Rifle Association.
I served as an officer of the NRA for nine years, including a two-year term as president. I saw NRA members turn the tide on Election Day 2000 to defeat Al Gore. We fought again to help defeat John Kerry in 2004. We can do the same with Sonia Sotomayor, if we call our U.S. Senators and tell them to vote against this anti-gun judge. No fewer than fourteen Democrat senators have solid records on the Second Amendment, and we must urge them to oppose this nominee.
Next year, the Supreme Court is likely to take up NRA v. Chicago, which will decide whether the Second Amendment applies to states and cities like it does the federal government. This case is as important as Heller, and will massively impact gun rights forever.
We already know where Judge Sotomayor stands. It's time to tell the Senate, "Vote No! on Sonia Sotomayor."
The NRA DOES NOT HAVE A WAIT AND SEE with this antiRights judge.
The goa should try to do something for once instead of worrying about what the NRA is doing.
goa = AWOL
Wait and see what? The 2nd amendment overturned? The record of this radical leftist is quite clear...at least the part she has chosen to make public.
If your state or city chooses to ban all guns or take away the ones that you already have ... Sonia Sotomayor says the Constitution can't help you. This position becomes all the more radical when it's revealed how she reached this conclusion.
Only six judges have denied gun rights ... three did so in a recent Seventh Circuit case, NRA v. Chicago, writing a detailed opinion that the Second Amendment doesn't apply to the states ... and they commended the case up to the Supreme Court after long and scholarly consideration.
Judge Sotomayor ... however, wrote only a single paragraph on the whole issue when deciding their own New York case, Maloney v. Cuomo. In one paragraph, she said the Second Amendment gives people no rights at all when it comes to state or city laws. She gave no explanation, ..
Sherman, set the Way Back Machine
Okay Mr Peabody.
December 6, 2004Among Sotomayor's many issues is, she's a DUNCE. She's already admitted she is where she is because of Affirmative Action. And that's allowed for a cover for her stupidity. So if Hairy Reed (sic) wants to see "poorly written opinions", all he has to do is open ONE Box of her records and pick one sheet of paper.
Dems' new Senate leader criticizes Justice Thomas
When asked to comment on Thomas as a possible replacement for Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Reid told NBC's "Meet the Press": "I think that he has been an embarrassment to the Supreme Court. ... "I think that his opinions are poorly written."
And even IF what he said about Justice Thomas had a grain of truth, compared to Sotomayor, Justice Thomas looks like William Shakespeare. And Hairy (sic), if you look up 'Legal embarrassment', you'll find Sonia's picture next to it. Even her fellow Lib Judges have criticized her POORLY written opinions!
Good one, Daffy.
THE CASE AGAINST SOTOMAYOR
ITEM She identifies herself as Puerto Rican first, even though she was born in the USA. Why does an American citizen cop a latino speech inflection (if she doesn't have a hidden agenda)?
ITEM In a College Thesis, Sotomayor Appeared to support Puerto Rican Independence. Did Soto have anything to do with Pres Clinton pardoning the FALN----violent Puerto Rican terrorists who bombed US installations? (Pardoned----so that then-Senate candidate Hillary could harvest the NY latino vote).
ITEM She is a member of the racial-thought police----La Raza. They are demanding "respect and fairness." That's latino for "shut up----close your eyes, ears and mouths........or else we'll get physical."
ITEM She is looking more and more like a mouthpiece for racial minority seeking to exert raw power over the rest of us---to marginalize the majority-----something one finds in failed Third World satraps.
ITEM The fact that she and her crowd do not understand a democracy is based on three co-equal branches of government is grounds for showing her the road.
ITEM Being Hispanic is not a criteria for seating a Supreme Court Justice. More is being made about her race than her actual judicial record.
ITEM She has the same disdain for America and its citizenry as evidenced by Obama.
Sotomayor's the "Latino Grievances" nominee......every ruling from the bench will be ironclad to redress every latino grievance since time immemorial. Americans will be paying with our freedoms......for those Frito Bandito commercials.
He was a "moderate" rat when he went to D.C. Now, he's a shrill hack. He's up for re-election next year, IIRC.
This woman’s record is dismal.
It's generally a good idea to support your statements. Here is the latest statement the NRA has put out that I could find.
NRA is reviewing Judge Sonia Sotomayors judicial opinions on issues related to the Second Amendment.
However, we are very concerned that she served on the three-judge panel in the case of Maloney v. Cuomo, in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said this year that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states. We believe that decision was based on a misreading of Supreme Court precedent. It relied on 19th century cases that, when properly read, do allow application of the Second Amendment to the statesas the Ninth Circuit recognized last month in the landmark case of Nordyke v. King.
Given the high probability that this issue will come before the Supreme Court in the near future, NRA looks forward to a full and open review of Judge Sotomayors record on this issue during the confirmation process.
Not exactly a call to arms, or even to write your Senator in opposition, is it?
If you have something later and/or more forceful from the NRA, by all means post it, or a link to it.
Lot's of Americans, primarily those from or whose ancestors were from Puerto Rico and the Southwest US, including the solider who lives accross the street from me, and two retired reserve Lt. Colonels, one Army, one Air Force, "cop latino speech inflections", it's what they heard growning up, and so that's how they speak, including those who do not actually speak any Spanish.
She has the same disdain for America and its citizenry as evidenced by Obama.
That is the reason to oppose her, and because she would nullify the second amendment, where it up to her. Not because she "cops a Latino accent".
(El Gato es un Gringo, in case you were wondering)
Do I have to start saving my NRA email alerts?
They archive them on the website. That's where I found what I posted, although it was a "news" item, rather than a grassroots alert. But just statement like: "The NRA sent out an email alert that said..." followed by a short summary.
I get the NRA alerts too, BTW.
I've heard guys born and raised in the US, often 3rd or 4th Generation, who had German accents and speech patterns, one from Milwalke the other from South/Central Texas, that old boy sounded like a first generation Kraut immigrant. I might have a tiny bit of German speech pattern myself, at any rate my mother has a few words that she pronounces very strangely. I can't say "wash" in a way that sounds "right" to anyone else.
The grandfather of my doctor (who is quite a bit younger than I am) would not speak English in his own home or on his own ranch. He too was not an immigrant.
Of course we came within a hair's breath of having German be the language of the US. My German ancestors didn't come until right after the Late Unpleasantness in the 1860s, but a coworker's family, with the same basic family name, spelled totally differently of course, came to upstate New York well before the American revolution. (The spellings? Coons and Kunz)