Judicial resistance to the second Amendment, specifically the Bruin decision is at an alltime high and there are now three cases before the Supreme Court to address assault weapon bans. Before I jump into, I want to thank the sponsor of the video, CMMG. That’s the dissent. It is awesome. It’s the mark 47. Used to be called the mutant. I love it. It’s amazing. They got some new stuff coming down the line.

They got the 45 caliber descent coming out. They got the new Defcan suppressor line being redesigned and revamped. A lot of cool stuff. CMMG, use my code GNG ten to save a ton of money on all of your purchases. No matter what it is, they have great tools. They’re great people. Made here in America, in Booneville, Missouri. I love you all. They’re great people. The owners even put their own personal money into lawsuits fighting the ATF.

So that alone deserves our support. CMMG, use code g and g ten. Judicial resistance is at an all time high on the Bruin decision. What is the Bruin decision? Just in case you aren’t aware if you’re one of the new gun owners that watch the channel. About a year and a half ago in June, the United States Supreme Court said that any law that infringed upon the Second Amendment, it was up to the government to prove that it was consistent with this nation’s historical gun restrictions or gun control based off of the text, history and tradition of the Second Amendment and the country around the time of the Second Amendment’s adoption and ratification.

So none of the new laws that have been put out in the last 20 or 40 years can meet that standard. None of them. Which means that’s not what the forefathers wanted. So assault weapon bans is the new thing that is being challenged before the Supreme Court. I told you a couple days ago about the Second Amendment foundation and Firearms Policy Coalition’s case in Bianchi v. Frosh. It’s now Bianchi v.

Brown because Frosh no longer is the top dog there. And I told you that it was atypical for the Supreme Court to grant Sir Shiarari to a case before its final judgment. But in that case, the Fourth Circuit did something that’s never been done. It was before a three judge panel and before they could render their decision, which they waited 13 months to do. So far, the onbox panel took it because many of us think the onbox panel knew that the three judge panel were going to say that the Saltwolf man was unconstitutional, per Bruin.

So Second Amendment foundation and FPC brought it to the Supreme Court, said, listen, they’re violating Bruin. Nobody’s listening to Bruin. Why don’t you fix this now? And since then, in the last couple days, two more assault weapon bans have been appealed to the Supreme Court for written assertari, and I’m here to tell you about them. The first one is Nagr’s case, national association for Gun Rights. Their case is Beavis v.

Naperville, challenging the Illinois assault weapon ban in the 7th. Unconstitutional, not only to Bruin, but according to Heller, guns. They’re in common use. McDonald’s, which applied the second Amendment to the states. Ktano v. Massachusetts, which said even tasers and all that stuff were covered and didn’t matter if they were not a thing at the founding. And then, of course, brewing text, history and tradition. In addition to NAGR’s Naperville case, SAFPC and the Illinois Rifle association have brought their case.

I always screw this one up. Harold v. Raul Raoul. Raoul. Either way, it’s another challenge to the Illinois assault weapon ban. So right now, the Supreme Court is sitting in their chambers, and once a week cases are distributed to them and they decide if they’re going to take them up or not. And they need four justices just to say, yes, we will take that case up. Of course, you need five to win.

But there are three cases now that will be distributed once a week until they either decide to grant a certificate or say, no, we’re not going to do that. And I will remind you again, it is atypical, which means it’s not normal for the Supreme Court to take a case before its final judgment. None of these three cases have had their final judgment. However, all three of these cases are a blatant infringement to the Second Amendment, a blatant violation to the Bruin decision, the Katano decision, McDonald, Heller, the constitution, the Bill of Rights.

So we’ll see what’s going on. And in these cases, I believe it was NHR’s Naperville case. I’ve read three cases in the last three days. It’s all jumbled together, but I believe it’s that case. They even mentioned what Hawaii did when Hawai said, you know what? The spirit of Aloha trumps the second amendment, and you don’t have Second Amendment rights because Aloha, that’s just nuts. Okay, so the Supreme Court right now, let’s make a break time.

Let’s not really make a break time, because even if they say they don’t want to take these cases up. The cases will continue to their final judgment, and it’ll just take longer and longer before it gets to the Supreme Court. But ultimately, the Supreme Court’s going to have to address this hold. Hopefully it’s with this court the way it’s made up now, because this is, for those of you who are getting older, like myself, you have seen multiple versions of the Supreme Court as justices are hired and die or retire.

This is the most second amendment friendly Supreme Court makeup we’ve ever had, ever. So, yeah, hopefully they’ll take this up and I will let you know. If you want to stay in the know, you want to know what’s going on, then subscribe to the channel down below. I will keep you in the loop, twist each other again. Be safe, stay vigilant, and carry a gun. You are your own first responder.

Never forget that. The police can’t be there just like that. And no government official will ever be there to save you. Take care. .

See more of Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News on their Public Channel and the MPN Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News channel.