Within a single month, "Progressive" judges decided that law-abiding Americans do not have the right to freely bear arms, but non-citizens living here illegally do.
How can the left logically square these two decisions? Not only do their policies support a massive influx of illegal immigrants, but they also want to arm them while blocking law-abiding citizens from exercising the same rights.
"While the Supreme Court of Hawaii is free to determine-apparently through the power of the 'Aloha Spirit'-that its own identically worded state constitution affords protection for only a collective right, it is not free to override the meaning afforded by the U.S. Supreme Court in Heller, McDonald, and Bruen to the federal constitutional right to keep and bear arms," Amy Swearer, senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation's Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
In the past, the notion that the Bill of Rights uses phrases like "Person," "People," or "Individual" in place of "Citizen" has been used to establish who is entitled to the rights in the first 10 constitutional amendments.
Anyone who breaks the law can temporarily or permanently lose their rights, including the right to bear arms.
Not only do we see the federal government overstepping its position by strengthening its many agencies to restrict the rights of Americans, but we also now have ideology-driven judges legislating from the bench without remorse.
Speaking of giving illegal immigrants more rights, California, in all its "Progressive" wisdom, bypassed federal law in 2022 by allowing immigrants in the U.S. working under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program to become police officers.
No comments:
Post a Comment