SCOTUS news and opinions

[danjuno]

Critical support to the Supreme Court waging class warfare against property owners tbh

 

[Arwon]

If a property is "open to the public" (whatever that may entail--I'm assuming retail stores and the like), attempting to get permission from the management before carrying a gun onsite might become so onerous that it'd in effect "shadow ban" gun owners from even trying in the first place.
That may be desirable for some, but it still is a curtailing of civil liberties. In this instance, such liberties should not succumb to property rights having to re-define them. And if the presence of a gun owner becomes a real concern, my advice would be for property owners to demand that the person simply leave and prosecute them under the label of trespassing if not; that might be a more sensible approach to the issue.

It is also telling that the Hawaii law, according to its advocate, apparently relied upon an old Louisiana gun law part of the "Black Codes" targeting recently-emancipated black slaves that had to behave likewise. I think that alone was enough to send up red flags to those justices already sympathetic towards gun ownership.
These two links go into more of that and the oral arguments in Wolford v Lopez:

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/20/supreme-court-hawaii-gun-control-00738208

Supreme Court appears sympathetic to gun owners’ challenge to Hawaii law

The Supreme Court on Tuesday appeared to side with a group of Maui gun owners in their challenge to a Hawaii law restricting their ability to bring their guns onto […]

www.scotusblog.com

Ok but this is all starting from completely insane premises like it being normal to have people just walking around with guns and going into shops with them and stuff

 

[Broken_Erika]

Ok but this is all starting from completely insane premises like it being normal to have people just walking around with guns and going into shops with them and stuff

But you see, if you aren't carrying an assault rifle with a 120 round magazine with you at all times, the King of England can come in and start pushing you around!

 

[EnglishEdward]

Yes, and he might mace you to death OR deploy the holy hand grenade of Antioch.

 

[choxorn]

But you see, if you aren't carrying an assault rifle with a 120 round magazine with you at all times, the King of England can come in and start pushing you around!

Exactly, MURICA means we have freedoms, like the Bill of Rights clearly says we can bear arms, that means sun's out, guns out and open carried. What are we, some kind of craphole tinpot dictatorship where the leader has an office full of gilded paintings, who gets media figures he doesn't like fired or cancelled when they criticize him, and has a personal army he can send to occupy cities that resist him?

 

[EnglishEdward]

At the moment, it is looking more like the latter.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Believing that owning and carrying weapons guarantees personal freedom from a government is so naive and childish, not to mention insane...

What guarantees freedom is following the constitution and the rule of law, separation of powers, respect for international human rights declarations, right to the due process, independent judiciary... So just everything humanity has been developing for centuries and has cost sweat and blood to achieve and Trump and the republicans are defecating on.

I truly believe that Trump and supporters will try to cling to power by any means necessary, first by rigging the election and declaring victory, even if the fraud is obvious, as we have already seen, and then by suppressing subsequent protests and uprisings. Only if the military's loyalty to the Constitution is strong enough or at least a part of it, will Americans be able to keep their freedom, probably after a civil war. That moment of collective madness that made possible Trump's reelection wont come cheap.