Justice Dept.: Missouri governor can't void federal gun laws

[struth]

"Sanctuary cities" have been instructing their police to ignore federal immigration law for years

Wrong.

The Constitution prohibits the Federal government from compelling states and local jurisdictions from enforcing Federal laws, including immigration laws.

agreed…hence the xiden doj is wrong here. They can’t force Missouri to enforce federal gun laws.

 

[Turtlesoup]

"Sanctuary cities" have been instructing their police to ignore federal immigration law for years

Wrong.

The Constitution prohibits the Federal government from compelling states and local jurisdictions from enforcing Federal laws, including immigration laws.

Yes, immigration laws are the jurisdiction of the feds only.

No....that isn't right.

The Federal Role in United States Immigration

The United States Constitution does not define a federal power over immigration, yet courts have deemed it a “plenary power” of a sovereign nation. United States immigration law has developed extensively, often free of judicial review.

www.nationalgeographic.org

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It would be nice if conservatives would at least READ the US Constitution before they pass laws that won't be upheld upon a court challenge, thereby wasting everyone's time in the process. Instead, it would be nice if they spent their time actually working to get things done for the people. But I guess that's too much to ask..

Agreed.

But most conservatives have nothing but contempt for the Constitution.

And they know what the law is, but they don’t care – it’s all pandering to the base and political theater.

Conservative lawmakers pass these laws in bad faith with the intent of provoking a lawsuit – and when these laws are appropriately invalidated by the courts, they whine and lie about ‘liberal’ judges and ‘tyrants in black robes’ who ‘legislate from the bench.’

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Republican lawmakers who worked to pass the bill have said they were motivated by the potential of more restrictive gun laws in the Biden administration.

More rightwing ignorance of the law – or contempt for the law.

Only Congress can enact Federal firearm regulatory measures, not the president.

 

[whitehall]

After a former KKK member appointed to the Court by FDR created the modern version of "separation of church and state" based on a Jefferson letter and later the liberal Court found a "right to privacy" that didn't appear in the Constitution to justify the murder of the unborn we get a freaking lecture from the left about the 2nd Amendment and Constitutional law. Give me a break.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The DOJ may be right but you can’t force the locals to cooperate with the Feds.

That’s why I expect a move by the democrats to federalize all police.

that's a double edge sword that cuts both ways.
On one hand democrats championed defunding the police and their supporters cheered them
Now if they federalize the police those defenders will turn on them sweet.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

States can have jurisdiction, but the federal government can not unless it is explicitly authorized in the Constitution.

The 2nd amendment is an absolute prohibition in ANY federal jurisdiction, but was never intended to prevent any or all state or local jurisdiction over firearms.

The Second Amendment explicitly attributes the right to keep and bear arms to the people, not to the states nor the federal government.

The states have no more legitimate authority to violate this right than the federal government does.

 

[LeftofLeft]

The Federal Government Democrats refuse to enforce Immigration Laws….. they will even go out of their way to give illegals tips on how how to avoid ICE. Once again, Democrats have set a precedent that will bite them in the ass.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

I don't give a shit what the SCOTUS or any level of government decides. The 2nd Amendment is clear. The right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed. There is no other way to interpret that.

What’s clear is the right’s contempt for the Constitution, its case law, and the rule of law.

And among the most fundamental tenets of the rule of law is that the Supreme Court determines what the Constitution means – including the Second Amendment; the Court’s interpretive authority is settled, accepted, and beyond dispute.

As such, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed the fact that the Second Amendment right is not unlimited, that it’s subject to limits and restriction by government, provided those limits and restrictions comport with Second Amendment case law, as determined by the Supreme Court.

Shall not be infringed you loon, there is no other way to interpret that. Thomas Jefferson, you know the guy that ******* authored the Constitution, had several things to say about the people and their right to bear arms.

No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms.

Laws that forbid the carrying of arms disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.

The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

I don't give a shit what the SCOTUS or any level of government decides. The 2nd Amendment is clear. The right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed. There is no other way to interpret that.

What’s clear is the right’s contempt for the Constitution, its case law, and the rule of law.

And among the most fundamental tenets of the rule of law is that the Supreme Court determines what the Constitution means – including the Second Amendment; the Court’s interpretive authority is settled, accepted, and beyond dispute.

As such, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed the fact that the Second Amendment right is not unlimited, that it’s subject to limits and restriction by government, provided those limits and restrictions comport with Second Amendment case law, as determined by the Supreme Court.

No one is saying the individual gun rights of the 2nd amendment are unlimited.
The point of the 2nd amendment was to absolutely and completely deny ANY and ALL federal jurisdiction over firearms.
And while it would have been nice if the SCOTUS had upheld the constitution as they should have, what the SCOTUS did by violating the 2nd amendment, by allowing federal firearm laws, was to make themselves complicit in crime.
Now all 3 branches of the federal government have become intolerably corrupt and a clear and present danger to the democratic republic described by the constitution.

Again, individual gun rights are not unlimited, but ONLY by state and local regulations.
Any and all federal firearms laws are a clear and blatant violation of the Constitution, and should be considered insurrection against the democratic republic.

The reason for the second amendment was to protect the peoples right to keep and bear arms and that includes state government, FYI since the second amendment is a protected right in the U.S. Constitution it places the protection of said right under the authority of the federal government

While it is true the reason for the 2nd amendment was to protect the people's right to keep and bear arms, it was intended to be a total ban on any and all federal jurisdiction over firearms, but was NOT intended to prevent any local or state jurisdiction.
It is only the 14th amendment that restricts state and local jurisdiction over firearms, but that is not absolute. Some state and local firearm regulation legislation can then be legal. As long as it can be shown to be necessary in order to protect the rights of others.

No they can't the Constitution is the ultimate law of the land. You wouldn't put up with a State banning free speech or making Christianity a states only religion. The same thing applies to the 2nd. States can not pass laws that restrict a Constitutional right.

 

[Batcat]

that's a double edge sword that cuts both ways.
On one hand democrats championed defunding the police and their supporters cheered them
Now if they federalize the police those defenders will turn on them sweet.

Fair point.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Then why do we have sanctuary cities for illegal aliens if the Federal government is so damn powerful?

Just as there’s no such thing as Second Amendment ‘sanctuary’ states, there’s no such thing as ‘sanctuary cities.’

Whether it’s the enforcement of Federal immigration law or Federal firearm law, the Federal government cannot compel state and local jurisdictions to enforce those Federal laws.

State and local authorities are at liberty to assist in the enforcement of Federal laws if they elect to do so, but state and local jurisdictions cannot penalized local officials who volunteer to assist, which is at issue here.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

But Missouri should have won.
The federal government has ZERO firearm jurisdiction, so any attempt by any federal agent to enforce any gun law should result in their arrest.

Wrong.

Missouri should have lost – the notion of Second Amendment ‘sanctuary’ is idiocy completely devoid of legal and Constitutional merit:

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” Article VI, US Cont.

Federal law is the supreme law of the land, preempting state and local laws.

Federal authorities are at complete liberty to enforce Federal laws in any state or jurisdiction.

If anyone’s going be arrested, it will be anyone interfering with Federal authorities enforcing just, proper, and Constitutional firearm laws.

there is only one Constitutional gun law and it THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

“In a letter sent Wednesday night and obtained by The Associated Press, Justice officials said the U.S. Constitution's Supremacy Clause outweighs the measure that Gov. Mike Parson signed into law Saturday. The new rules penalize local police departments if their officers enforce federal gun laws.” ibid

The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution – the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, Federal law supersedes that of state and local laws; a fact settled, accepted, and beyond dispute, reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in Cooper v. Aaron (1958).

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You made ZERO argument for any federal firearms laws having any legitimacy.

The Supreme Court has – and that’s all that matters.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The DOJ may be right but you can’t force the locals to cooperate with the Feds.

There’s no ‘may’ about it, Justice is in fact correct.

And again, no one seeks to force state and local officials to enforce Federal firearm laws; that’s the sole purview of Federal authorities.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

That’s why I expect a move by the democrats to federalize all police.

That’s why you’re a conservative, because you’re a liar – and this is a lie.

It’s also ignorant idiocy.

No one can ‘Federalize’ local law enforcement.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Sanctuary cities" have been instructing their police to ignore federal immigration law for years

Wrong.

The Constitution prohibits the Federal government from compelling states and local jurisdictions from enforcing Federal laws, including immigration laws.

agreed…hence the xiden doj is wrong here. They can’t force Missouri to enforce federal gun laws.

Hence you obviously don’t understand the issue.

Justice never said it could ‘force’ state and local jurisdictions to enforce Federal firearm laws, just the opposite.

Justice is simply stating a fact that has been settled, accepted, and beyond dispute since the founding of the Republic: Federal law is the supreme law of the land, state and local laws that conflict or interfere with Federal laws are invalid – such as this Second Amendment ‘sanctuary state’ nonsense, including the Missouri law that seeks to “penalize local police departments if their officers enforce federal gun laws.”

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

that's a double edge sword that cuts both ways.
On one hand democrats championed defunding the police and their supporters cheered them
Now if they federalize the police those defenders will turn on them sweet.

This is a lie.

Democrats do not advocate taking money from local law enforcement; nor do they advocate ‘Federalizing’ local law enforcement.

 

[struth]

"Sanctuary cities" have been instructing their police to ignore federal immigration law for years

Wrong.

The Constitution prohibits the Federal government from compelling states and local jurisdictions from enforcing Federal laws, including immigration laws.

agreed…hence the xiden doj is wrong here. They can’t force Missouri to enforce federal gun laws.

Hence you obviously don’t understand the issue.

Justice never said it could ‘force’ state and local jurisdictions to enforce Federal firearm laws, just the opposite.

Justice is simply stating a fact that has been settled, accepted, and beyond dispute since the founding of the Republic: Federal law is the supreme law of the land, state and local laws that conflict or interfere with Federal laws are invalid – such as this Second Amendment ‘sanctuary state’ nonsense, including the Missouri law that seeks to “penalize local police departments if their officers enforce federal gun laws.”

seems rather pointless…since missouri simply is saying we aren’t enforcing federal law.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

that's a double edge sword that cuts both ways.
On one hand democrats championed defunding the police and their supporters cheered them
Now if they federalize the police those defenders will turn on them sweet.

This is a lie.

Democrats do not advocate taking money from local law enforcement; nor do they advocate ‘Federalizing’ local law enforcement.

you truly are a moron to openly lie
Jo Biden said he was for redistributing funds from the police
The Squad supported defunding the police
Hell, it's democrat-controlled cities that have defunded their police departments.
Harris even praised Los Angles for taking millions from the police
YOU ARE A LYING SACK OF DOG SHIT.