https://www.news2a.com/national/pam-bondi-doj-tells-supreme-court-please-dont-hear-a-case-on-the-nfa/The Pam Bondi Department of Justice continues to frustrate the actions of pro-gun rights groups that are seeking intervention from the Supreme Court.On October 8, D. John Sauer, Solicitor General Counsel of Record, and Matthew R. Galeotti, Acting Assistant Attorney General, representing the Department of Justice, submitted a brief opposing a request for the Supreme Court to hear a case challenging the National Firearms Act.The case of Rush v. United States, which is being appealed from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, addresses whether the National Firearms Act’s registration and taxation requirement for short-barreled rifles facially violates the Second Amendment.The Justice Department’s official position is that the petition for a writ of certiorari should be denied, or in layman’s terms, the Supreme Court should pass on this case.Why?First, they argue that the NFA is constitutional “because short-barreled rifles combine high destructive power with easy concealability, they are especially susceptible to criminal misuse.”They also claim no other court has held the NFA unconstitutional, writing, “Petitioner cites no case in which a court of appeals has held the NFA unconstitutional.”They also trivialize the case, calling it an attempt, “…to resolve a variety of other analytical issues, such as the meaning of the word 8 ‘Arms in the Second Amendment.”
>>518665811very weird. youd think as a top lawyer youd be interested in all manner of legal cases and hearings. surely for the love of the game alone youd sit back and watch, to hear the arguments, the thrill of the logic, the rationale, the reasoning... im literally shaking just thinking about it eeee
were any mass shootings done with an SBR? or any shootings? I don't understand restricting a more comfortable rifle for smaller framed individuals.
>>518665811>First, they argue that the NFA is constitutional “because short-barreled rifles combine high destructive power with easy concealability, they are especially susceptible to criminal misuse.”to be fair this is actually completely true
>>518666398furthermore if some criminal wanted to commit a crime they could/would just, you know, put a brace on a "pistol" or take the "pistol" upper and put it on a regular rifle lower.. the NFA is retarded and so it the ATF. I'm pretty sure most people working in those groups don't even own guns.
>>518666543>NRA Files Another Lawsuit Challenging the National Firearms Act>Today, the National Rifle Association—along with the American Suppressor Association, Firearms Policy Coalition, and Second Amendment Foundation—announced the filing of another lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA). The case, Jensen v. ATF, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.>Originally, the NFA imposed a $200 tax and established a tax-enforcement registration regime for certain classes of firearms. However, President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBB) eliminated this tax for suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and NFA-defined “any other weapons,” leaving only the registration requirement in place. >The complaint in Jensen argues that since the tax has been eliminated, the NFA’s registration regime can no longer be justified under Congress’s taxing power—nor any other authority granted under Article I of the Constitution.>The complaint also asserts that the NFA’s registration regime for suppressors and short-barreled rifles violates the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court has established that any regulation on arms-bearing conduct must be consistent with our nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. And, the complaint argues, there is no tradition that supports the NFA’s registration regime for protected arms such as suppressors and short-barreled rifles.https://www.nraila.org/articles/20251009/nra-files-another-lawsuit-challenging-the-national-firearms-actTrump literally signed the Big Beautiful Bill, so he agreed to NRA pork.Sorry, not sorry.
>>518666543There's no exception in the 2nd Amendment for arms which are especially susceptible to criminal misuse. Therefore such a characteristic couldn't make an otherwise unconstitutional law constitutional.
>they're not commonly owned because they're banned>they're ok to ban because they're not commonly ownedliterally their reasoning.
>>518665811Miller decision in '35 upheld the NFA specifically because the weapons it banned weren't in common military use (the court was unaware of the common use of trench guns at the time). If we revisited the NFA based on the miller decision the NFA would have to be thrown out given that now SBRs, SBSs, DDs, MGs, suppressors, and AOWs are all in common military use. Really reading supreme court decisions, even from Scalia, just disheartens the hell out of me because it is painfully obvious that they cherry-pick case law and selectively apply the constitution to uphold the status quo.
>>518665811>And then they came for me
>>518665811>NFA is constitutionalI don't recall anything in the Constitution™ discussing "short-barreled rifles" and "concealability", but I'm a Leaf. We're not allowed to have a viable piece of paper as a legal touchstone to keep tyranny in check.
>>518666543All arms are susceptible to criminal uses
>>518666543To be fair youre a dumb niggerCriminals don't follow laws
promote peace and love and its nice to see japanese east asian men fuck blonde white girls, brunette white girls, ebony girls, ginger white girls, asian girls, brown girls, latina girls, mixed race girls, and etccc
>>518666398it's simply the elite trying to increase their odds of survival this system is about to collapse and the first thing that will happen is white men going into to rich people's areas and mowing them down
>>518665811I want a legal grenade launcher right meow
