Supreme Court dismisses controversial gun rights case
I am pleased that the Supreme Court followed my amicus argument and did not take up this much-manipulated case.
The controversy in the case was non-existent, as New York had repealed the challenged law; and the Constitution requires a “case or controversy,” precisely to prevent free-range Courts from adjudicating matters at their political convenience.
Everyone should understand that a small group of very big donors funds the effort (a) to select Justices (via Federalist Society and Leonard Leo), (b) to campaign for their confirmation (via Judicial Crisis Network), (c) to bring strategic cases to the Court behind plaintiffs of convenience (via groups like Pacific Legal Foundation), and (d) to flood the Court with a chorus of scripted amici (see the appendix in my brief laying out the front group amici in this case).
There is a devastating irony in the Justices’ supposed concern about a “manipulated” docket in this case, a case aswirl with right-wing manipulation.
Moreover, Republican-appointed Justices, while claiming that NRA opponents were gaming the system to get this decision, at the same time flagrantly invited another gun case to finish their project. They can’t help it, it seems.
