• SatanicNotMessianic@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    You are correct, but it’s all about the interpretation of the law. Remember that the assault weapons ban, federal legislation on all the various tchotchkes, and the state laws on weapons and licenses have all been found constitutional. And while it won’t happen in this court, this court did establish the principle that they can reverse a decision that has historically guided laws and interpretations in this country for decades as being fundamentally flawed. The path to getting 50 votes in the senate to kill the filibuster, then expand the court with new appointees to turn the balance, then wait for the firearms cases to come in is easier than changing the constitution. I mean, we can’t even do that much at this point, but the math is easier.

    • Jordan Lund@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      They were found Constitutional before Heller in 2008… that’s the problem. The court has only veered harder right since then.

      California’s AWB and magazine size restrictions are being challenged, I don’t expect them to survive. The magazine limit has already been struck down by lower courts, I don’t see the current Supremes being more favorable to it.