New York Attorney General Letitia James and other leftists got hit with some bad news.
The U.S. Supreme Court made a ruling that finally fixed a faulty left-wing policy.
But James and other leftists are howling in rage after this major Supreme Court loss.
James rants and raves after Supreme Court overturns the bump stock ban
Democrats don’t believe the courts exist to interpret the law and decide cases based on the Constitution.
Radical leftists instead want a results-oriented judiciary that rubber stamps their anti-constitutional agenda by bending the law to arrive at the desired outcome.
And Letitia James’ angry reaction to the Supreme Court overturning the bump stock ban is a perfect example of this philosophy.
“Make no mistake: bump stocks are dangerous devices that can cause incredible harm,” James posted on social media in the aftermath of the decision.
Gunman Stephen Paddock allegedly used a bump stock in the 2017 Las Vegas shooting and gun-grabbers thought they could ban the device no matter what the law or the Constitution said.
“The shooter in the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history in Las Vegas used a bump stock,” James continued.
“This decision jeopardizes the safety of every community in this country,” James added.
Disagreement on the Supreme Court
But James wasn’t the only leftist who showed their Constitutional illiteracy on this subject.
That “honor” also extended to left-wing Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor.
Sotomayor wrote an embarrassing dissent on the case that only served to expose that she doesn’t know anything about either the Constitution or firearms.
“This is not a hard case,” Sotomayor stated.
Sotomayor showed she didn’t know the difference between a semiautomatic weapon – one pull of the trigger fires one bullet – and an automatic weapon where one pull of the trigger fires multiple bullets.
In her dissent, Sotomayor falsely claimed a bump stock altered a semi-automatic rifle into an automatic weapon.
“All the textual evidence points to the same interpretation. A bump-stock equipped semi-automatic rifle is a machine gun because (1) with a single pull of the trigger, a shooter can (2) fire continuous shots without any human input beyond maintaining forward pressure,” Sotomayor wrote.
Sotomayor then claimed the law was whatever she felt it was.
“When I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck,” Sotomayor added.
In stark contrast, Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion and included a quick explainer for leftists like Sotomayor and James.
“Semiautomatic firearms, which require shooters to reengage the trigger for every shot, are not machineguns,” Thomas stated.
“Between every shot, the shooter must release pressure from the trigger and allow it to reset before reengaging the trigger for another shot,” Thomas continued.
The conservative majority clearly got the case right on both the law and the facts.
But James and Sotomayor don’t care about either.
They are radical gun-grabbers who want bump stocks banned, and since the court didn’t arrive at their preferred outcome, they threw a hissy fit.
Informed American will keep you up-to-date on any developments to this ongoing story.
