comment: >
  
  None of the recent pro-gun rulings have had any basis in the law.  It started with the Heller ruling, which magically changed the meaning of the second amendment over 2 centuries after it was ratified, and it's all been downhill from there.  Some states actually banned concealed carry in the early 1800s, when some of the founding fathers were still alive, but 200 years later, that is now unconstitutional.  It's absurd how the Trump-appointed judges have become dictators that overrule the people who are supposed to make laws, and no one is noticing.
context: They don't always read their Federalist Society ghost written "decisions." Judge Cannon in FL cited evidence and arguments never submitted by the plaintiff. >
  
  Until Congress gets off their asses and starts impeaching + removing judges for bad conduct, this will keep happening. Judges in this country face zero accountability. They should fear public backlash. >
  
  There's no way 67 senators will vote against anybody for removal. >
  
  Too bad they didn’t kick out insurrectionist justices after Jan 6th. Democrats squandered two years. >
  
  The thing that makes this so insulting is the flagrant stupidity and ineptitude  of the judge who clearly doesn’t care if he gets caught >
  
  Why would he care? There won't be any repercussions. Judges pretty much think they are above the law these days. >
  
  Legally they can be considered to be above the law. Seeing how hard it is to get police officers for verifiable crimes, it's next to impossible to get a judge of any stature in jail even without a loaded house/senate. >
  
  This is what happens when we elect domestic terrorists. They appoint incompetent judges to help them to destroy our government's ability to function and to uphold the few laws they care about. >
  
  This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 93%. (I'm a bot)
  
  
  So kudos to Judge Ho for trying to build a historical case! Unfortunately, neither of these cited opinions have much to do with the Second Amendment.
  Judge Ho appears to have seen "Unqualified command of the Second Amendment" and called it a day.
  How did something so sloppy end up in an appellate opinion? Obviously, there's a dearth of historical precedent for the proposition that the Second Amendment affords an individual right to gun ownership, but armed with AI-facilitated caselaw search tools all he could come up with for pre-2001 support is an opinion from 1961 that concludes the opposite way?!?!
  
  
  Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Amendment^#1 right^#2 Second^#3 gun^#4 court^#5 >
  
  The goal isn't to be historically accurate. Just like with Dobbs, the goal is to put women "in their place". >
  
  Which is why they want to monitor the menstrual cycles of women in Florida now. How fucking sick >
  
  They not only want too, they are demanding it, and writing laws to ensure that it happens. >
  
  5th Circuit stooge hangs "Will rape precedent for appointment" sign around neck and hits the conservative catwalk. >
  
  That and the "fuck them kids" line are so hot right now. >
  
  I can’t wait until they start letting criminals keep their guns with them when they go to prison. >
  
  I cannot imagine them ever doing that. There is too much profit to be made in the illegal provision and trade of arms in prisons. The guards would throw a fit if they lost this income source. At best we might see the sale of arms legalized under some tortured reading of the 2nd Amendment, but the guards would have to get a cut of the action. >
  
  More laws have been passed to restrict voting then to restrict gun ownership. America is pathetic. >
  
  Funny anyone thought this was anything but political. Wasn’t about guns. Wasn’t about abusers. Certainly wasn’t about victims. Was about how much money he could take home from the NRA >
  
  ...from Putin, via the NRA. >
  
  The 5th circuit remains a threat to the Republic. >
  
  I wish Biden would speed up the process of getting Judges confirmed to the 5th circuit on an emergency basis. It's too imbalanced. >
  
  Why does it have to be an emergency basis? I'm not sure how nominating judges is done, but he's not allowed to nominate as many as he wants, at anytime? >
  
  No, Congress has to expand the size of the court and then he can fill the vacancies. >
  
  Oh so the “activist judges” were right wing all along. Raise your hand if you’re remotely surprised >
  
  “Heeee’s a Ho” >
  
  The fight for being the least informed judge is on! >
  
  Ho no he didn’t!!! >
  
  Why would he bother. It's doubtful that he wrote any part of the opinion himself anyway. It was almost certainly written by the plaintiff's attorneys. >
  
  Seems like a ridiculous unforced error. All the guy had to do was cite the latest spate of 2nd Amendment cases from SCOTUS and say, "Things have obviously changed at the top, so here at the next level down we have to account for that."
  It's tough when an obviously-broken clock is right. Shit's obviously broken, and that's embarrassing. We should be fixing it regardless. That doesn't change the fact that a court pushing back on the deprivation of rights pre-conviction would be hailed as a legally- and ideologically-consistent position, and maybe even just a "good" one generally, if it were about basically anything else besides guns. >
  
  A 'ho' in more ways than one >
  
  Some people look so unintelligent >
  
  To be fair, he’s a ho. >
  
  He’s doing Ho activities, with Ho tendencies >
  
  Ho's are his friends! Ho's are his enemies! >
  
  Is he really a Ho tho? >
  
  Fo sho. >
  
  Did he also write, 'Hurtin for a Squirtin?' >
  
  sorry! >
  
  I don’t think people quite understand how much less safe the world is for women now. 
  Zero abortion access in many states. 
  Very little justice for domestic violence, rape and assault. 
  Domestic violence perps can now have guns. 
  This isn’t going to work out well. >
  
  Terrible