Обсуждение

See also: gun laws for well regulated militias in the times when arms were muskets. Can we apply that to modern situations or no?

Friggin' idiot. That's what amendments are for, not EOs from demented dictators.

If a law, or constitutional rule, is outdated because of new developments which the writers didn't anticipate, then *change* the law; don't pretend it has already been changed. Oh, and the constitution's framers didn't write the 14th Amendment. (Directed at Kavanaugh, of course, not at you, Kate.)

What modern situations?! Babies being born????

Bicycles. Ballpoint pens. Telephones. Refrigerators. Cars. Airplanes. Steel Ships. Paved Roads. Electric Lights. None of these were "anticipated by the Constitution's Framers" So The F*ck What?

It's wild how the Republican justices pointedly DO NOT use such logic with respect to the Second Amendment.

By their logic here "modern situations that were unknown or unanticipated by the Constitution’s Framers” would include assault rifles. Time to round them up fellas. Supreme Court put it in writing.

*cough* assault rifles *cough*

What the fucking fuck?

Calvinball!

You can always amend the Constitution. The process is known as the Amendment. Is Brett dense?

Oh, please.

who needs constitutional amendments when fratboy Barf is around? cheers! 🍻

Do semi-automatic rifles count as “modern situations” unanticipated by the Founders?

Oof, Thomas: "In doing so, the Court adds to the sad history of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was designed and understood to secure equal rights for the freed blacks but has instead been repurposed for political projects that the Reconstruction Congress did not support."

Oh well, then it sounds like we can control giant guns that the original framers didn’t know would exist. Right?

burn that paper, it's old and the founding fathers were shitty slave owners

Kavanaugh apparently doesn’t understand the Amendment process. Or that Amendments become the Constitution once approved.

He's such an idiot.

except guns, i guess

New exceptions can be added for "modern situations that were unknown or unanticipated by the Constitution's Framers." Does this also apply to other amendments? Such as the 2nd? Christ sake the framers had muskets.

Does this go for assault weapons that murder & terrorize school children or nah?

What happened to originalism, Brett? Guess it only matters in gun cases.

Modern situations. 🤔 Say, aren’t automatic weapons a modern situation unforeseen by the framers?

What on earth was "unknown or unanticipated" about being born here, even to foreigners, in 1868 when the 14th amendment was added. There were plenty of immigrants at the time, many of whom had babies... Many Americans are descendants of said babies. Nothing new here, move along...

just say "we don't think that George Washington would have considered a Haitian immigrant to be a real human being" already, this is taking forever

Try telling that to the second amendment… 🤷🏻‍♂️

"Kavanaugh says that Constitution is an "enduring document" and that new exceptions to birthright citizenship can be added" [...] ~ Via laws passed by Article I AKA Congress Does he mean the constitution is a plenary document? 🤔

Is Beerboy gonna say that when the assault rifle ban gets to the Court next term? How about same-sex marriage? Campaign finance controls? This asshole should keep his over-privileged, over-entitled mouth shut and be grateful he's not in prison for attempted rape.

The constitutions framers were all dead before the 14th amendment was ratified

Now say the same thing about the second Ammendment.

Funny how that doesn’t apply to the 2nd Amendment. Also, I guess Republicans have decided to throw “originalism” out the window now.

I guess the 14th amendment doesn't count.

So he’s not an “original intent” kind of guy after all. Just another cherry picker

Can this reasoning from a justice be used to defend gun control laws? I think mass shootings could be considered a modern situation that the founders hadn’t anticipated.

So this can be applied to 14th amendment but not the 2nd.

It’s a living document except when we say it isn’t.

Another "originalist" proves he is completely full of shit.

And so…. By that reasoning, same for 2A?

bsky.app/profile/teuf...

Does that apply to 2A as well? The framers could never have conceived of modern guns so we should modernize that amendment too.

Surely the same logic applies to the 2nd amendment, yeah?

‘Kavanaugh says that…new exceptions…can be added for "modern situations that were unknown or unanticipated by the Constitution’s Framers"’ Yeah…let’s start with automatic weapons and a host of voting rights issues and then the size and term of a Supreme Court seat given modern life expectancy

Originalism is a crazy drug @radiofreetom.bsky.social

An Originalist in the streets but a Living Constitutionalist in the sheets.

So, when do we get started on banning any firearm other than a musket?

Great! He must have the same take on the second amendment then

Their who allegiance argument fails on who gets to decide allegiance. Some Jan 6 planners got convicted of seditious conspiracy yet Trump, a felon got to decide they were not seditious. If the fake dictator gets decide allegiance based on what he thinks is law, we are all screwed

Does he feel the same way about assault weapons and the 2nd Amendment bc they sure as hell were not anticipated in 1790. You can't pick and choose what parts of the Constitution to follow.

Cool, so we can rewrite the second amendment accordingly. Thanks Brett.

Thanks for the ideas, you drunk. Let’s update the 2nd amendment now. And the electoral college. And expand the Supreme Court.

Those same principles apply to restructuring the court

So that applies to the 2nd Amendment, too, Judge Kavanaugh? 🤔

He doesn't believe that.

curious that kav creates caveats for "modern situations" violating the 14A, but alito in the dobbs decision said essentially that modern abortion procedures weren't constitutional bc they hadn't been invented yet. 🙄

Now do assault weapons, Kavanaugh

He knows they stepped in it

Smoriginalism...

In other words, the Civil War amendments don't count because the...checking my notes here...the slave owning Founders did not write them Bodes poorly for 19A

If that's the case, y'all should probably check out if any of those OTHER amendments that didn't anticipate "modern situations that were unknown or unanticipated by the Constitution's Framers" need an update too...

no originalists in foxholes I guess.

Just like how the FFs could have never accounted for automatic weapons?

Funny how shit like, I don’t know, reproductive rights, don’t fall into the whole not in the text but a modern situation that wasn’t anticipated loophole

Lmfao incredible

Unbelievably hypocritical for a so-called originalist. What a complete fraud.

Hmm, wonder what kind of exceptions they'll come up with, it's a mystery

* Does not apply to the Second Amendment.

How very “original” of him

So, originalism when it's congenial, otherwise not so much.

“Modern situations” like the loss of our Constitution and the rise of a Lord of Misrule deified emperor?

originalism

So he’s saying it’s a living document?

I didn't know the framers considered birthright citizenship.

that is literally the opposite of originalism, the hypocrite.

oh so NOW we're textualists

"Enduring"? WTF? But also living/evolving?

If that were actually true sensible gun laws could be passed.

Guessing that’s the opposite of a preview of his opinion in next year’s AR-15 case.

I think the “framers” of the 14th amendment were familiar with nonwhite people, if that’s what he’s hinting at.