Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Just when I think I can’t be any more shocked by the outrageous and unethical behavior of members of Congress, they surprise me again. Well, not exactly. I’m not surprised at all that these five senators would threaten the Supreme Court with a legal brief, impugning the Court’s integrity and motivations even before they rule on an upcoming case.
The five senators—Mazie Hirono, Sheldon Whitehouse, Richard Blumenthal, Richard Durbin, and Kirsten Gillibrand—filed their brief against the case called New York Rifle and Pistol Association v. the City of New York. The totalitarian city of New York believed that it could severely restrict the carry of firearms and get away with it. The original legislation was changed to read that a person could transport a gun only to a second home, a gun range or a shooting competition outside the city. Quite generous of the city, don’t you think? And in the process, they declared moot the petitioner’s claim of violating the Second Amendment. Not quite, Bill DeBlasio; you can’t toss out the Second Amendment all by yourself.
Now to return to the senators’ claim against the Supreme Court.
The senators are accusing the Court of being motivated by politics in their decisions—conservative politics, of course. The fact that most of the politicization of the Court has been conducted by Democrats is, to them, irrelevant. Never mind that they nearly destroyed the reputation of Brett Kavanaugh to keep him off the Court.
Here are some of their claims:
Petitioners’ effort did not emerge from a vacuum. The lead petitioner’s parent organization, the National Rifle Association (NRA), promoted he confirmation (and perhaps selection) of nominees to this Court who, it believed, would ‘break the tie”’ in Second Amendment cases. During last year’s confirmation proceedings, the NRA spent $1.2 million on television advertisements declaring exactly that: ‘Four liberal justices oppose your right to self-defense,’ the NRA claimed, ‘four justices support your right to self-defense. President Trump chose Brett Kavanaugh to break the tie. Your right to self-defense depends on this vote.’
Sounds like really insidious behavior doesn’t it? Do you think that the NRA is also acting to protect Second Amendment rights?
Then there’s this statement in the senators’ brief:
Out in the real world, Americans are murdered each day with firearms in classrooms or movie theaters or churches or city streets, and a generation of preschoolers is being trained in active-shooter survival drills. In the cloistered confines of this Court, and notwithstanding the public imperatives of these massacres, the NRA and its allies brashly presume, in word and deed, that they have a friendly audience for their ‘project.’
I wonder how the justices might react to these “accusations of influence.”
This action by these senators is just one more example of the disdain they have for the Supreme Court, except for those justices whom they believe favor their issues. The brief is grandstanding, of course, demonstrating (they think) that they are fighting for the people. Instead, their disregard for the integrity of the three branches of government and the people who serve is mindboggling and revolting. They have only further confirmed their irresponsibility and megalomania.
I would like to think that the justices will brush this off as a mild distraction, or better yet, ignore it, and continue with the business of the Supreme Court.