Judge Sotomayor is pretty predictable. She steps into the oral argument with a series of questions she wants to ask, and continues asking if she will get the answer she wants. I think supporters will be at a disadvantage, but that’s part of the game.
During the birthright citizenship case, Judge Sotomayor asked the same question several times. She will change the hypo to explain the limits of the government’s position on a nationwide injunction: what if the government attempts to confiscate all of the guns in America? Should all gunners file individual lawsuits to seek relief?
Page 13: Judge Sotomayor: – So, when the new president comes in and orders that I have the right to take a gun from everyone, he sends the army to take the army –
Page 41: Judge Sotomayor: If you think this is illegal enforcement action, or it is illegal enforcement action, and if you believe it is Congress that decides citizenship rather than executives, then why should some of us believe that others will take away illegal executive action, or what we think is something that we think has been taken away from all citizens?
Page 44: Judge Sotomayor: – Repealed repeatedly. We can enter the history of citizenship, but I will still go back to my questions. You argue that there is absolutely no way for the President to stop this and put this aside in order to stop him from unconstitutional, clearly unconstitutional.
Does Justice Sotomayor really want to know what the relief plan will be if the government confiscates everyone’s guns? This treatment does not include rule 23.
Almost 250 years ago, King George III and General Gage Confiscate the firearm From Americans. What happened next? Lexington and Concord, shots were heard all around the world. As far as I can remember, the patriots did not go to the court of chance to seek fair relief.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6iko6lmxf4
There is a similar story in Texas history. During the Texas Revolution, Mexican forces demanded that the Texans of Gonzalez city surrender their cannons. What did the Texians say? Come and take it! The remedies here were not fair. It was warlike. The Texians did not respond in construction norms. They answered with a cannon of destruction. This was Lexington, Texas. And the Battle of Gonzalez led to the Battle of the Alamo, which led to Texas’ independence. Do you feel the pattern of what happens when the government tries to disarm people?
I took this photo when I visited the Gonzalez museum.
I remember Judge Kozinski’s opinion Silvierav. Lockyer:
The outlook for tyranny may not catch the headlines of how vivid stories of gun crime do it on a daily basis. However, few saw the third empire come until it was too late. The second amendment is the provision of the end, designed for a very rare situation in which all other rights have failed. The government supports re-election and refuses to silence those who protest. If the court loses the courage to object, or if it is unable to find someone to enforce their decree. But while these unforeseen circumstances may seem today, their lack of preparation makes it a mistake for free people to make it once.
Fortunately, framers were wise enough to entrench the rights of those who maintain their arms within our constitutional structure and endure them. The purpose and importance of that right is still fresh in their minds and they spelled it out clearly, so it cannot be forgotten.
Here are some important lessons to learn. The court cannot resolve all issues. The court should not resolve all issues. The courts do not resolve all issues.
