Home / General / The Court and Gavin Newsom’s hypocrisy trolling

The Court and Gavin Newsom’s hypocrisy trolling

Comments
/
/
/
1171 Views

I can understand why Newsom proposed doing for firearms what Texas is doing to abortion rights. But it’s also another example of liberals thinking that pointing out Republican hypocrisy will accomplish something despite all evidence to the contrary:

Blue states that try to apply the Texas framework to guns, though, will find themselves in a very different legal landscape than red states banning abortion. The fear of litigation was sufficient to close most abortion clinics in Texas in part because the Court’s majority has telegraphed its skepticism of the idea that the state cannot tell a woman when to bear a child. Gun-rights activists need have no such fear; the Court’s majority is on their side.

This is why the justices in the majority are so cavalier about rewarding the schemes of conservative activists to nullify constitutional rights. They are in the majority. They can say one thing now, and another thing later. These five justices can direct the destiny of the nation as they choose, without having to worry about reciprocation, because they can decide how legal principles are applied, or, if they choose, simply throw them out and invent new ones.

Anyone who has paid a modicum of attention to the Court and whose interests are not reliant on its prestige and reputation can already see this clearly. The Court’s majority believes it is unconstitutional for a state to bar counselors in anti-abortion “crisis pregnancy centers” from lying to clients, but entirely constitutional to force doctors to attempt to dissuade women from seeking an abortion if they want one. It is a majority that believes the executive has nigh-unreviewable foreign-policy powers, unless there’s a harsh anti-immigration policy that it would like to keep in place. It is a majority that believes it is bigotry to question the sincerity of religious conservatives demanding a right to discriminate, and folly not to demand such proof from the condemned. It is a majority that believes “there is no right more basic in our democracy than the right to participate in electing our political leaders,” unless those political leaders decide that certain votes should not count as much or that particular voters should be kept from the ballot box.

California legislature: “Anyone possessing an assault rifle can be sued for ONE MILLION DOLLARS and no state official is involved in enforcing it. I’d like to see the Supreme Court wiggle out of this one!”

[Supreme Court issues a stay within 48 hours of the appeal from 9CA being filed, and rules the statute unconstitutional within another three months. Gorsuch’s majority opinion consists of a picture of Calvin peeing on a map of the state of California.]

“Ah well, nevertheless.”

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
It is main inner container footer text