Basically the logic of the amendment says that without the militia existence there is no requirement for the gun ownership right. Not that folks can’t still be allowed to own guns, but there is no requirement that they be allowed to do so. So whatever the court decides, it is new law.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...weigh-senator-mike-lee-for-high-court-vacancyI heard 5 names today, 2 women, none were Lee.
AbsolutelyIMO the 2nd admendment applies to all firearms and includes any firearms a milita would potentially use which includes any firearms a military would use.
Are you psychic now, just crying wolf, or just spreading seeds of doubt? What makes you think either party is going to get enough votes to do this.One thing to bear in mind is that if the Court becomes too conservative, the Democrats, when they come back into power, will increase the membership to 11 or 15 Justices (court packing). FDR failed to do that in the 1930's, but there were a lot of conservative Democrats back then. Today the Democratic Party is far more to the left. They will do this, and then the 2A will once again be in danger.
A d I heard nothing on the woman if they are pro gun
Steve
Just my himble humble opinion, but the only review questions Senators should be asking when candidates are "reviewed" is about their experience, past record, and if they will swear to "uphold and defend the Constitution". That's it.
When they attempt to do it. And when they do, the same Congress should impeach them.But how do you do that when you are for destroying the Constitution like some are now finally admitting as their ultimate goal?