Friday, June 24, 2022

Scotus Defends Second Amendment Overturns New York Tyrannical Law

Supreme Court Decision on New York Second Amendment Case: A Blog Post

On June 23, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a landmark ruling on the case of **New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen**, striking down a New York state law that required applicants for a license to carry a concealed handgun in public to show "proper cause" or a special need for self-defense. The Court held that the law violated the Second Amendment, which protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms for self-defense.

The case was brought by the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (NYSRPA), an affiliate of the National Rifle Association, and two individuals who were denied concealed carry licenses by New York authorities despite meeting the basic requirements of age, citizenship, and lack of criminal record. They argued that the proper cause requirement was arbitrary and subjective, and that it effectively prevented law-abiding citizens from exercising their constitutional right to bear arms outside the home.

The Court agreed with the plaintiffs, ruling 6-3 that the proper cause requirement was inconsistent with the historical understanding and tradition of the Second Amendment. Writing for the majority, Justice Clarence Thomas said that "the right to bear arms is not a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees". He cited historical evidence that showed that Americans have always valued the right to carry firearms for self-defense, and that most states have adopted "shall-issue" permitting systems that grant concealed carry licenses to anyone who meets objective criteria, such as passing a background check.

Thomas also rejected the arguments of New York and other "may-issue" states that have similar laws, such as Hawaii, California, and Massachusetts, that their laws were necessary to protect public safety and prevent crime. He said that there was no conclusive evidence that restricting concealed carry reduces violent crime, and that some studies have suggested the opposite effect. He also said that New York's law was not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest, as it imposed a blanket ban on most people who wished to carry a handgun for self-defense.

The majority opinion was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. Alito wrote a concurring opinion, in which he criticized lower courts for failing to apply the Supreme Court's previous decisions on the Second Amendment, such as **District of Columbia v. Heller** (2008) and **McDonald v. Chicago** (2010), which affirmed the individual right to possess firearms for self-defense in the home. Kavanaugh also wrote a concurring opinion, joined by Roberts, in which he expressed his agreement with Thomas's historical analysis and his hope that lower courts would follow the Court's guidance on future Second Amendment cases. Barrett wrote another concurring opinion, in which she emphasized the importance of textualism and originalism in interpreting the Constitution.

The dissenting opinion was written by Justice Stephen Breyer, and joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Breyer argued that the majority's historical approach was flawed and selective, and that it ignored the practical realities and consequences of its decision. He said that the proper cause requirement was consistent with a long history of regulating firearms in public places, and that it served a vital interest in protecting public safety and preventing gun violence. He also said that the majority's decision undermined the ability of states and localities to adopt reasonable gun regulations that suit their specific needs and circumstances.

The Supreme Court's decision in **NYSRPA v. Bruen** has been widely seen as a major victory for gun rights advocates and a significant expansion of the Court's gun jurisprudence. It has also sparked a wave of legal challenges to other federal and state gun laws, such as bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, background check requirements, and red flag laws . The decision has also been criticized by some lower court judges, legal scholars, and gun control activists as unworkable, dangerous, and out of touch with reality.

Roe vs Wade Overturned by Supreme Court!

 Finally the day we pro-lifers have been waiting for and knew would come. They mocked us, told us we were on the "wrong side of history" or that we were against women, were they wrong. We won!  The Supreme Court just aborted the horrendous decision of Roe vs Wade. 

You can read the decision here: I will update this post as I learn more details  

# Analysis of SCOTUS decision on Roe vs Wade

On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) issued a historic ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 case that established a constitutional right to abortion in the United States. The decision, written by Justice Samuel Alito and joined by four other conservative justices, upheld a Mississippi law that banned abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, with no exceptions for rape, incest or fetal anomalies. The ruling effectively ended federal protection for abortion rights and left the issue to the states, many of which have already enacted or are poised to enact laws that would severely restrict or ban abortion altogether.

In this blog post, I will analyze the main arguments and implications of the SCOTUS decision, as well as the reactions and responses from various stakeholders and groups.

## The main arguments of the SCOTUS decision

The majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the case that challenged the Mississippi law, relied on two main arguments to justify overturning Roe v. Wade and its subsequent reaffirmation in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992).

The first argument was that Roe and Casey were **"egregiously wrong"** in recognizing a constitutional right to abortion based on the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, which protects the liberty of persons from state interference. The majority claimed that this right was **"not rooted in the nation's history and tradition"** and that it had **"no basis in the Constitution's text or structure"**. The majority also criticized Roe and Casey for creating a **"balancing test"** that weighed the state's interest in protecting fetal life against the woman's interest in terminating her pregnancy at different stages of gestation. The majority argued that this test was **"unworkable"** and **"arbitrary"** and that it had led to **"confusion and uncertainty"** in lower courts and among legislators, doctors and women.

The second argument was that Roe and Casey had **"failed to produce any stable national consensus"** on abortion and that they had instead **"provoked a strong and enduring backlash"** from those who opposed abortion on moral, religious or political grounds. The majority contended that Roe and Casey had **"imposed a significant burden on society"** by generating **"relentless litigation"**, **"divisive moral debates"** and **"polarized politics"**. The majority also asserted that Roe and Casey had **"undermined democratic self-governance"** by taking away the power of the people and their elected representatives to regulate abortion according to their own values and preferences.

The majority concluded that Roe and Casey should be overruled because they were **"wrongly decided and should be discarded"** and because they had **"caused significant damage to our constitutional system"**. The majority declared that there was no constitutional right to abortion and that states were free to enact laws that protect unborn life from conception onward.

## The main implications of the SCOTUS decision

The SCOTUS decision has profound implications for the legal status of abortion, the health and rights of women, and the political landscape of the country.

The most immediate implication is that the Mississippi law banning abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy is now in effect, making it one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the nation. According to the Center for Reproductive Rights, which represented the sole abortion clinic in Mississippi that challenged the law, this means that **"nearly all abortions are now illegal in Mississippi, forcing women to travel out of state — if they can afford to do so — or carry an unwanted pregnancy to term against their will."**

The broader implication is that many other states will follow suit and enact laws that ban or limit abortion access even further. According to the Guttmacher Institute, which tracks abortion laws and policies across the country, there are currently **24 states** that are considered **"hostile or very hostile to abortion rights"**, meaning that they have enacted multiple laws that restrict abortion access or have expressed an intention to ban abortion if Roe v. Wade were overturned. These states include Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia



Catholic Church (751) God (405) Atheism (342) Jesus (335) Bible (306) Jesus Christ (280) Pope Francis (229) Atheist (227) Liturgy of the Word (192) Science (152) LGBT (146) Christianity (138) Pope Benedict XVI (79) Rosa Rubicondior (79) Gay (78) Abortion (75) Prayer (65) President Obama (57) Physics (53) Philosophy (52) Liturgy (51) Vatican (50) Christian (49) Blessed Virgin Mary (43) Christmas (43) New York City (40) Psychology (40) Holy Eucharist (36) Politics (34) Women (34) Biology (30) Supreme Court (30) Baseball (29) Religious Freedom (27) NYPD (26) Traditionalists (24) priests (24) Space (23) Pope John Paul II (22) Racism (21) Evil (20) Health (20) First Amendment (19) Pro Abortion (19) Protestant (19) Theology (19) Christ (18) Astrophysics (17) Child Abuse (17) Death (17) Evangelization (17) Illegal Immigrants (17) Pro Choice (17) Apologetics (16) Donald Trump (16) Police (16) Priesthood (16) Pedophilia (15) Marriage (14) Vatican II (14) Divine Mercy (12) Blog (11) Eucharist (11) Autism (10) Gospel (10) Jewish (10) Morality (10) Muslims (10) Poverty (10) September 11 (10) Easter Sunday (9) Gender Theory (9) academia (9) Human Rights (8) Pentecostals (8) Personhood (8) Sacraments (8) Big Bang Theory (7) CUNY (7) Cognitive Psychology (7) Condoms (7) David Viviano (7) Ellif_dwulfe (7) Evidence (7) Barack Obama (6) Hell (6) Hispanics (6) Holy Trinity (6) Humanism (6) NY Yankees (6) Spiritual Life (6) Babies (5) Cyber Bullying (5) Gender Dysphoria Disorder (5) Massimo Pigliucci (5) Podcast (5) Pope Pius XII (5) The Walking Dead (5) Angels (4) Donations (4) Ephebophilia (4) Pope Paul VI (4) Catholic Bloggers (3) Death penalty (3) Evangelicals (3) Pluto (3) Pope John XXIII (3) Baby Jesus (2) Dan Arel (2) Eastern Orthodox (2) Encyclical (2) Founding Fathers (2) Freeatheism (2) Oxfam (2) Penn Jillette (2) Pew Research Center (2) Plenary Indulgence (2) Cursillo (1) Dan Savage (1) Divine Providence (1) Fear The Walking Dead (1) Pentecostales (1)