No, it seems like he may have just been persuaded that really the overwhelming majority of the market for ghost guns has been pretty conclusively proven to be people previously convicted of crimes that make it impossible for them to pass a background check, i.e. criminals. Also, he cited the ridiculousness of the ghost gun makers’ arguments. Specifically, that what they were selling weren’t firearms, when their marketing pretty brazenly made it clear they were selling firearms.
It may not matter for the next few years, unfortunately. It’s unclear if Trump’s Justice Department is interested in prosecuting ghost gun manufacturers. They probably aren’t, so the manufacturers may just completely ignore this ruling and go on about their business.
Barrett was already leaning away from MAGA a year ago. That’s not surprising. Honestly, the only hardcore MAGA justices are Thomas and Alito. Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Gorsuch are more traditional conservatives. And Barrett seems to be following in O’Connor’s footsteps and moving towards the left the longer she’s there.
“Other conservative commentators joined the conversation, including Catturd — a MAGA personality with 3.6 million X followers — who called Barrett “an absolute disgusting fraud.””
Along the lines of the discussion in the Law That Doesn’t Suck thread…
I’ve seen two seemingly opposite headlines from the SCOTUS ruling on the Venezuelan deportation ruling.
One type says the court ruled in favor of the T**** administration, upholding the deportations.
The other says the court ruled against the T**** administration for failing to follow due process.
I can see where both are sorta true. They ruled that, hypothetically, the administration could use the Aliens & Enemies Act to deport people from a country the US is at war with. What wasn’t clear is, does that apply to this case? We aren’t at war with Venezuela, the people deported weren’t agents of the Venezuelan government, and some weren’t even Venezuelan. They also ruled that, separate from above, the administration must allow due process for deportation even under the AEA.
So what gives? Does that mean the administration has to bring back all of the deportees and provide them with due process? That seems like what would be required, but none of the articles are drawing that conclusion. Or did they leave that up to the lower courts to decide?
This has a pretty good summary of the ruling, but basically, parts of the ruling are ok, parts are bad. None of it is good. And again, ACB joined the liberals.
ETA: The link I had intended to include to begin with. Sorry.
Mild disagree. This part is somewhat hopeful. We will have to see how it goes as MAGA attacks her as a “DEI judge.” (Somehow, this is not applied to Thomas, though. Wonder why? (No, I really don’t))
To qualify for this full pension, a justice must have served for a minimum of 10 years, and the sum of their age and years of Supreme Court service must total 80 or more.
Example:
A justice who retires at age 70 after 10 years of service, or at age 65 after 15 years of service, is eligible for a full pension.
Senior Status:
Justices can also retire from active service but continue to serve in a “senior status”, continuing to receive their salary and other benefits, provided they meet certain requirements.
