tyb
meme ammo.
o7
WHAT THE GENERAL PUBLIC WILL MAKE OF THE SCOTUS DECISION VIA A.I JOURNALISTS AND BOTS
https://search.brave.com/search?q=SUPREME+COURT+DECISION+ON+UNITED+STATES+V+RAHMI&source=desktop&summary=1&summary_og=a595eabf0caa26de4aaae3&tf=pw
SUPREME COURT DECISION ON UNITED STATES V RAHMI
On June 21, 2024, the Supreme Court delivered a unanimous decision in United States v. Rahimi, upholding a federal law that prohibits individuals subject to domestic violence restraining orders from possessing firearms. The Court ruled 8-1 that the law does not violate the Second Amendment, citing the government’s interest in protecting victims of domestic violence.
Background
The case involved Zackey Rahimi, who was subject to a restraining order due to a violent altercation with his girlfriend. Rahimi challenged the law, arguing that it violated his Second Amendment right to bear arms. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals had previously struck down the law, but the Supreme Court reversed the decision.
Majority Opinion
Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the majority opinion, stating that the law is constitutional because it serves a legitimate government interest in protecting victims of domestic violence. The Court noted that the law does not prohibit all gun ownership, but rather targets individuals who have been found to pose a credible threat to the physical safety of others.
Concurring Opinion
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a concurring opinion, emphasizing the importance of protecting victims of domestic violence. She noted that the law is a crucial tool in preventing gun violence and that the Court’s decision is a victory for survivors of domestic abuse.
Dissenting Opinion
Justice Clarence Thomas was the lone dissenter, arguing that the law is unconstitutional because it does not have a historical basis in the Second Amendment. He claimed that the law is an example of the government overstepping its authority and infringing on individual rights.
Impact
The decision is significant because it upholds a federal law that has been in place for nearly three decades. The law has been challenged by gun rights advocates, who argue that it infringes on the Second Amendment. The decision is seen as a victory for gun control advocates and a blow to the gun lobby.
Reactions
The decision was welcomed by advocates for victims of domestic violence, who praised the Court’s recognition of the importance of protecting survivors. The National Domestic Violence Hotline and the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence issued statements expressing gratitude for the decision.
The National Rifle Association (NRA) criticized the decision, arguing that it is an example of the government overstepping its authority and infringing on individual rights. The NRA claimed that the law is an example of “gun control” and that it will lead to further erosion of Second Amendment rights.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Rahimi is a significant victory for gun control advocates and a blow to the gun lobby. The decision upholds a federal law that has been in place for nearly three decades and recognizes the importance of protecting victims of domestic violence. The decision is a reminder of the importance of balancing individual rights with the need to protect public safety.
where this supreme court fails straight away.
it is not Gun Violence, it is Violence used with guns by a criminal.
Guns are not violent, the people using them for criminal purposes.
The 2nd Amendment is for self protection against the citizen by criminals and a corrupt government.
There reason for this a control of the narrative to weaponize it against the election and Maga.
A Dangerous precedent has just been set.
The criminals will not give up their guns, only the law abiding citizens will be target.
The individual states must reject this over reach by the Federal Government and supreme court decision.
This decision is playing on anons mind.
Anon is praying for cooler heads
They are pushing for a incident which will probably occur soon and escalate.
Evil and Dark forces are at work..
of course it is and it is retarded by what anon is seeing from the journalist covering the news is they are using its decision as a template to spread their narrative.
once it was the new york post, washington post as the leaders of a truth or lie narrative but this is changing daily as the paid for morans are being replaced by chatbots and a.i generated articles.
The journalists will be a target at some point and cannot go out and do on the ground reporting without getting push back and safety issues from a rapidly awakening peoples.
yep.
covered this with feminist weaponized divorce courts decisions.
part of the four red pills section.
kill it and flash her with the thingmebob.
creepy.
hannity i was under pressure to push the vaccines.
you wanna see a preview of the shitshow.
watch the farage interview with panomoran .
--–
NIGEL FARAGE INTERVIEW WITH THE BBC AND ONE OF ITS TOP MEDIA PROGRAM PANAROMA WITH INTERVIEWER NICK ROBINSON !!!
Note: hopeful this will stay up for a while before they take it down. A gotcha interview. similar to what trump will be doing on the 27th June in enemy territory.
they will not let farage debate the other leaders or with a audience on the bbc.
what a come down for nick robinson, he was like a college leaver with a complete lack of knowledge, trying to twist the narrative and throwing accusations. no wonder no one like the bbc, impartiality of this kind belongs in the dustbin of history. midwit is the only word anon can think of to explain the tactics used by this moran.
==
GE2024: Nick Robinson interviews Nigel Farage, tries gotcha questions (21Jun24)
https://youtu.be/s8tEBYClh_0
Getting very close to red dawn