Repealing the Second Amendment would seemingly be an impossible task. But the left will not so easily give up.
But if the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges teaches us anything, it’s that the age of judicial supremacy means that five justices can amend the Constitution far more efficiently than Congress and the state legislatures. And right now there are clearly four Supreme Court justices who are committed to the absurd view that the operative clause of the Second Amendment — “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” — doesn’t actually mean “the right of the people” and therefore doesn’t encompass an individual right to own a weapon, even for self-defense. More of this theory on the next page:
Any court can make a ruling, it is up to the States’ legislators to determine if the law will be changed. The Supreme Court has no authority, it can make rulings all day long. The decision still belongs to the States’ legislators!
Wouldn’t that call for a convention of the states? Not a SCOTUS decision? God help us !
This will be interesting. Let’s see who believes in the constitution !!!!
I don’t believe this.
THIS president DOES write laws and amends the at his discretion!!!
The Supreme Court already decided that the right tobear arms resided with the individual a few years ago. They should leave it alone.
It’s interesting to see this playing out. Do we realize that scotus continuously rules that it wasn’t an individual right until 2008? That the NRA started as a way to promote gun regulation and safety?
I support gun rights, but I also think people need to realize that rules change.
You can’t do that, LOSERS !!!!
Derilition of duty.
SHALL NIT BE INFRINGED.Is there something ambiguous about this? Oh, maybe ILLEGAL means something else to you too.Phucking libtards, geez:(