This new Kansas law could reopen Wickard v. Filburn.
I always wanted to live in Kansas.
Which is a ruling that definitely needs reopening.
So what guns are manufactured in Kansas?
Good luck with that. Clarence Thomas is the only SC Justice to call Wickard unconstitutional. The only justices to vote against fedgov in the Raich case were Thomas, O'Connor and Rehnquist. Even Scalia gave his full-throated support to Wickard
I wish it were not so, but Wickard is not going anywhere.
SCOTUS had better be careful if this gets to them. Any perceived erosion of the 10A and States Rights just might be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.
Hmmmm. How does one become UCLA “an expert in the politics of gun control . . . ?” Maybe by clerking in the 9th circuit, and being a child of Hollywood elite? Or perhaps co-authoring a “moderate” view of the 2nd Amendment? Hmmm. An expert in the politics.
I’ll take Kobach in court any day with the 2A and the Supremacy Clause.
Time to start framing our 2nd amendment rights as a civil rights issue. Obuma is Bull Conner turning on the hose and letting loose the dogs. And we don’t own “assault weapons,” they’re sporting rifles.
We need to take back our language from the purse-carrying liberal Nazi snobs.
And, yeh, let’s start calling the democrat party the Nazi party. The low-information voters know that Nazis are bad.
Holder is all bark. He has zero authority to challenge a state law of any sort. Until he sends a goon to violate it and said goon gets arrested Holder has what he likes to call “no standing”. He ought to read his own mail and STFU until he stirs up a legitimate/fake complaint. But I want to know who the federal genius will be willing to risk time in a Kansas jail?-—by pushing his luck in Kansas without letting the local county Sheriff know what he’s up to. County sheriffs do indeed have authority to ride herd on out-of-line fedz.
Wickard needs overturning or a very severe narrowing.
A hope for answers - Benghazi dam may break at last Could it doom Hillary?
Some noteworthy articles about politics, foreign or military affairs, IMHO, FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.
Amazing how Holder Inc. does business - if a State tries to enforce a Federal law that they don’t like, they sue the State for doing so. Now, they threaten to sue the State that wants to abide by the Constitution. The tyrants are becoming more bold and are preparing to become more physically forceful.
Holder is wrong WRT the Constitution, and it’s not even a close call.
I would like to see a state law that makes criminals of Federal officers who fail to enforce national laws. By failing to enforce the law, they are endangering the people of the state.
This is what's Constitutional.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.. Period, end of story.
No background checks, no "permits", no registering guns.
Just read up on that case. What a bunch of evil, malicious twisting of the meaning of words - something courts do all to often!
It was revisited. Remember Raich, built on Wickard, ruling anything which reduced demand for illegal interstate commerce could be violently regulated by the Feds.