The Usurper Obama Nominates His First Anti-Second Amendment Justice


Bohemian

New member
Second Amendment:
Sotomayor was also a member of the panel that issued a per curiam opinion in another controversial case that may be headed for the Court next year. In Maloney v. Cuomo, 554 F.3d 56 (2009), the panel considered (as relevant here) a claim by a New York attorney that a state law prohibiting possession of a chuka stick (also known as nunchaku, a device used in martial arts consisting of two sticks joined by a rope or chain) violated his Second Amendment right to bear arms. The district court rejected the claim on the ground that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states. On appeal, the panel affirmed. Relying on the Supreme Court’s 1886 decision in Presser v. Illinois, it explained that it was “settled law . . . that the Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government seeks to impose” on the individual’s right to bear arms. The Supreme Court’s recent decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, the court continued, “does not invalidate this longstanding principle.” And while acknowledging the possibility that “Heller might be read to question the continuing validity of this principle,” the panel deemed itself bound to follow Presser because it “directly controls, leaving to the Supreme Court the prerogative of overruling its own decisions.” Maloney’s lawyers intend to file a petition for certiorari in late June.

Opinion of the court, including Judge Sotomayor
in Maloney v. Cuomo (2009)

The Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government seeks to impose on this right.

Judge Sotomayor rejected a claim that a New York ban on a martial arts weapon (a nunchuka) violated a man's Second Amendment rights, explaining the Second Amendment only applies to the federal government.

Just what part of "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" does she not understand?

Write your Senators asking them to oppose the confirmation of Judge Sotomayor to the SCOTUS!


NRA-ILA :: Action Center

U.S. Senate: Senators Home

The Second Amendment does not state “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” Except… if your zip code is X, your standing at Y, or the type or class of weapon/arm you have or desire to have is Z…

"Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people." - Tench Coxe 1789
 

This from the Second Amendment Foundation:

NEWS RELEASE
Sotomayor Nomination an Obama Slap at Second Amendment
BELLEVUE, WA – The nomination of Second Circuit Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor to replace retiring Justice David Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court is a slap at gun rights and the Second Amendment, the Second Amendment Foundation said today.

Judge Sotomayor, a New York native, ruled on a Second Circuit Appeals Court panel that the Second Amendment is not a fundamental right and does not apply to the states in the case of Maloney v. Cuomo. This ruling is in direct conflict with a Ninth Circuit Court ruling in the Nordyke v. King case in California that the Second Amendment is incorporated through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

“While Democrats in Congress have been making great strides in the gun rights arena, refusing to consider a renewal of the Clinton gun ban, and offering overwhelming bipartisan support for legislation allowing citizens to carry firearms in national parks, President Obama just demonstrated that he prefers judges who oppose Second Amendment rights,” said SAF founder Alan M. Gottlieb.

Incorporation may be taken up by the high court during its next session beginning in October, because attorneys in the Maloney case plan to appeal in late June.

“If the Maloney appeal is accepted by the Supreme Court,” Gottlieb wondered, “would Justice Sotomayor – provided she is confirmed – recuse herself from deliberations?”

Judge Sotomayor has written an opinion that declined to order the release of certain information under the Freedom of Information Act. In one case, according to SCOTUSblog, she wrote that the “unwarranted invasion of privacy” for individuals whose names would be release under an FOIA request outweighed the public interest.

“Would a Justice Sotomayor be just as protective of the privacy rights of concealed carry permit holders if a newspaper wanted to publish that information,” Gottlieb asked. “We hope that during Senate confirmation hearings, someone asks about her positions on incorporation and the privacy rights of gun owners. The Second Amendment needs to be expanded, not eviscerated.”
 

gogriz91

Torch Wielding Villager
Not surprised, just had hoped he would pick less of an activist judge. Thank God Roberts is the Chief Justice.
 

fuhr52

New member
The Republicans do not have the votes or the backbone to stop her. I have had all the hope and change I can stand.
 

Bohemian

New member
Second Amendment:
Sotomayor was also a member of the panel that issued a per curiam opinion in another controversial case that may be headed for the Court next year. In Maloney v. Cuomo, 554 F.3d 56 (2009), the panel considered (as relevant here) a claim by a New York attorney that a state law prohibiting possession of a chuka stick (also known as nunchaku, a device used in martial arts consisting of two sticks joined by a rope or chain) violated his Second Amendment right to bear arms. The district court rejected the claim on the ground that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states. On appeal, the panel affirmed. Relying on the Supreme Court’s 1886 decision in Presser v. Illinois, it explained that it was “settled law . . . that the Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government seeks to impose” on the individual’s right to bear arms. The Supreme Court’s recent decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, the court continued, “does not invalidate this longstanding principle.” And while acknowledging the possibility that “Heller might be read to question the continuing validity of this principle,” the panel deemed itself bound to follow Presser because it “directly controls, leaving to the Supreme Court the prerogative of overruling its own decisions.” Maloney’s lawyers intend to file a petition for certiorari in late June.

Opinion of the court, including Judge Sotomayor
in Maloney v. Cuomo (2009)

The Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government seeks to impose on this right.

Judge Sotomayor rejected a claim that a New York ban on a martial arts weapon (a nunchuka) violated a man's Second Amendment rights, explaining the Second Amendment only applies to the federal government.

Just what part of "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" does she not understand?

Write your Senators asking them to oppose the confirmation of Judge Sotomayor to the SCOTUS!


NRA-ILA :: Action Center

U.S. Senate: Senators Home

The Second Amendment does not state “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” Except… if your zip code is X, your standing at Y, or the type or class of weapon/arm you have or desire to have is Z…

"Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people." - Tench Coxe 1789

In addition, to contacting our Senators regardless of the party they are in, via the aforementioned links; we need to be contacting the Chairman of the RNC Michael Steele, and asking him to implore the remaining GOP Senators to stand together in opposing the confirmation of Judge Sotomayor and any other nominee that does not have a established record of supporting the Constitution as it was written and intended by our founding fathers...

IF all the Senators that voted for the National Park Firearm Ban repeal, voted against the nomination, that would certainly send a very clear message...

Contact RNC Chairman Michael Steele:
Link Removed

I also take it as a personal challenge, since Gun Ban New York Senator Chucky Schumer stated to the media that if the GOP or anybody else opposes Judge Sotomayor's confirmation that they do so at their own peril...

HEY NEW YORKERS! THE CONSTITUTION APPLIES TO YOU TOO! STOP LETTING GUN BAN CHUCKY SCHUMER AND CAROLYN MCCARTHY SPEAK FOR YOU!

CALL THEM, EMAIL THEM, SNAIL MAIL THEM, FAX THEM!

DON'T GIVE THEM A MOMENTS PEACE WHEN IT COMES TO YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS!

AND IF THEY KEEP UP THE SAME CRAP, MAKE SURE YOU AND EVERY BODY YOU KNOW IN YOUR NECK OF THE WOODS VOTES THE BUMS OUT!

ITS LONG OVER DUE THAT KARMA FOUND THESE TWO...

VOTE FREEDOM FIRST!
 
Free NRA Membership

I just received this from a friend in Texas that asked I pass it on, and it looks like we need all the help we can get.

In case you were not aware...

The NRA is giving FREE 1-yr memberships to everyone
who wants to join.
They are trying to build up their membership to fight pending
legislation that impacts our right to keep and bear arms.

It is very important that anti-gun congressmen see how many
people they will have to fight to get their legislation through.

https://www.nrahq.org/nrabonus/accept-membership.asp

PLEASE PASS THIS ON TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW!!!
This can include spouses and children also.
 
I don't know why some are surprised at this nomination. Most of us knew what would happen and that it's basically an even trade. We really need to hope one of the conservative judges don't retire for whatever reason.
 

HK4U

New member
Exactly. No surprise and we have at least 4 years and perhaps 8 of the Obamanation. He will be able to do a lot of damage in that amount of time. I shudder to think where this country is heading.
 

Bohemian

New member
Exactly. No surprise and we have at least 4 years and perhaps 8 of the Obamanation. He will be able to do a lot of damage in that amount of time. I shudder to think where this country is heading.

Black Tuesday January 20th, 2009, the Beginning of an ERROR...

Link Removed
 

Bohemian

New member
RINO Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) in an interview with CNN, shows his support for Anti-Constitution Judge Sotomayor...

Hatch: Sotomayor 'highly likely' to be confirmed, barring surprises - CNN.com

We need to write Senator Hatch and RNC Chairman Michael Steele and let them know RINO's will no longer be tolerated! PERIOD!
Link Removed

Judge Sotomayor clearly does not support the Constitution as it was written and our founding fathers intended...

Contact RNC Chairman Michael Steele:
Link Removed
 

Bohemian

New member
Obama Picks Anti-gun Judge for the Supreme Court
-- Time to start contacting your Senators right away

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org


Friday, May 29, 2009


Unless you've taken a very long Memorial Day vacation, you've no doubt
heard the big news.

President Obama has picked an anti-gun radical to replace Justice David
Souter on the Supreme Court.

Obama's pick is Judge Sonia Sotomayor, who is currently on the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Second District. There she has racked up an
anti-Second Amendment record and has displayed contempt for the rule of
law under the Constitution.

The Heller decision put the Supreme Court in support of the
Constitutional protection of the individual right to keep and bear arms.
Sotomayor, a politically correct lover of centralized government power
(as long as she is part of the power elite), immediately went into
counter-attack mode against the Heller decision.

Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which ruled
in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to the
states. As she and her cohorts claimed, the Supreme Court has not yet
incorporated the states under the Second Amendment. Until then, she
believes, the Second only applies to the District of Columbia.

This is pure judicial arrogance -- something Sotomayor relishes (as long
as she is one of the ruling judges). In fact, protection of the right
to keep and bear arms was a major objective for enactment of the
Fourteenth Amendment, as recently freed slaves were being disarmed and
terrorized in their neighborhoods.

But Sotomayor disdains this important right of individuals, as indicated
by an earlier opinion from 2004. In United States v. Sanchez-Villar,
she stated that "the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental
right."

Sotomayor has held very anti-gun views, even as far back as the 1970s.
Fox Cable News reported yesterday that in her senior thesis at Princeton
University, she wrote that America has a "deadly obsession" with guns
and that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to
firearms ownership.

Sotomayor's Second Amendment views go hand in hand with her politically
correct views on the law and the role of judges.

In a speech given at Duke University in 2005, she made it abundantly
clear that judges are involved in making policy. Realizing that this
did not sound very judicial (even though most judges act on this basis),
Sotomayor tried to laugh off her brazen admission: "I know this is on
tape and I should never say that, [audience laughing], because we don't
make law -- I know. Um, okay. I know, I'm not promoting it, I'm not
advocating it." The audience continued to laugh. They got the joke.

But Sotomayor's joke will be on us and our liberties if she gets
confirmed to the Supreme Court. And that is why we need to start
contacting our Senators early and often, urging them to vote against
this dangerous nomination.

ACTION: Please contact your two Senators and urge them to oppose the
nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court. You can
go to the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
Link Removed to send your Senators the
pre-written e-mail message below.


----- Pre-written letter -----

Dear Senator:

If you cherish the Second Amendment and agree that it protects an
individual right to keep and bear arms -- as stated by the recent Heller
decision -- then you must vote against Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

This choice for the Supreme Court is totally unacceptable! Consider a
partial rendering of her anti-gun record:

* Sotomayor ruled in United States v. Sanchez-Villar (2004) that "the
right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right."

* Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which
ruled in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to
the states. This makes her more liberal than the Ninth Circuit, which
stated in April that the Second Amendment does apply to the states.

* Sotomayor has held very anti-gun views, even as far back as the 1970s.
Fox Cable News reported on May 28 that in her senior thesis at Princeton
University, she wrote that America has a "deadly obsession" with guns
and that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to
firearms ownership.

I will consider a vote in favor of Sotomayor as the most anti-gun vote a
Senator could cast. To send an anti-gun liberal judge to the Supreme
Court for the rest of her life is to establish "legislation without
representation." After all, she says that the courts are where policy
is made, and once she's there, we'll never be able to vote her out.

Again, please vote against this dangerous nomination.

Sincerely,
Your Second Amendment Supporting U.S. Born Citizen And Constituent (your name)
 

American ME!

Armored Saint
Obama Picks Anti-gun Judge for the Supreme Court
-- Time to start contacting your Senators right away

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org


Friday, May 29, 2009


Unless you've taken a very long Memorial Day vacation, you've no doubt
heard the big news.

President Obama has picked an anti-gun radical to replace Justice David
Souter on the Supreme Court.

Obama's pick is Judge Sonia Sotomayor, who is currently on the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Second District. There she has racked up an
anti-Second Amendment record and has displayed contempt for the rule of
law under the Constitution.

The Heller decision put the Supreme Court in support of the
Constitutional protection of the individual right to keep and bear arms.
Sotomayor, a politically correct lover of centralized government power
(as long as she is part of the power elite), immediately went into
counter-attack mode against the Heller decision.

Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which ruled
in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to the
states. As she and her cohorts claimed, the Supreme Court has not yet
incorporated the states under the Second Amendment. Until then, she
believes, the Second only applies to the District of Columbia.

This is pure judicial arrogance -- something Sotomayor relishes (as long
as she is one of the ruling judges). In fact, protection of the right
to keep and bear arms was a major objective for enactment of the
Fourteenth Amendment, as recently freed slaves were being disarmed and
terrorized in their neighborhoods.

But Sotomayor disdains this important right of individuals, as indicated
by an earlier opinion from 2004. In United States v. Sanchez-Villar,
she stated that "the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental
right."

Sotomayor has held very anti-gun views, even as far back as the 1970s.
Fox Cable News reported yesterday that in her senior thesis at Princeton
University, she wrote that America has a "deadly obsession" with guns
and that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to
firearms ownership.

Sotomayor's Second Amendment views go hand in hand with her politically
correct views on the law and the role of judges.

In a speech given at Duke University in 2005, she made it abundantly
clear that judges are involved in making policy. Realizing that this
did not sound very judicial (even though most judges act on this basis),
Sotomayor tried to laugh off her brazen admission: "I know this is on
tape and I should never say that, [audience laughing], because we don't
make law -- I know. Um, okay. I know, I'm not promoting it, I'm not
advocating it." The audience continued to laugh. They got the joke.

But Sotomayor's joke will be on us and our liberties if she gets
confirmed to the Supreme Court. And that is why we need to start
contacting our Senators early and often, urging them to vote against
this dangerous nomination.

ACTION: Please contact your two Senators and urge them to oppose the
nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court. You can
go to the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
Link Removed to send your Senators the
pre-written e-mail message below.


----- Pre-written letter -----

Dear Senator:

If you cherish the Second Amendment and agree that it protects an
individual right to keep and bear arms -- as stated by the recent Heller
decision -- then you must vote against Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

This choice for the Supreme Court is totally unacceptable! Consider a
partial rendering of her anti-gun record:

* Sotomayor ruled in United States v. Sanchez-Villar (2004) that "the
right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right."

* Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which
ruled in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to
the states. This makes her more liberal than the Ninth Circuit, which
stated in April that the Second Amendment does apply to the states.

* Sotomayor has held very anti-gun views, even as far back as the 1970s.
Fox Cable News reported on May 28 that in her senior thesis at Princeton
University, she wrote that America has a "deadly obsession" with guns
and that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to
firearms ownership.

I will consider a vote in favor of Sotomayor as the most anti-gun vote a
Senator could cast. To send an anti-gun liberal judge to the Supreme
Court for the rest of her life is to establish "legislation without
representation." After all, she says that the courts are where policy
is made, and once she's there, we'll never be able to vote her out.

Again, please vote against this dangerous nomination.

Sincerely,
Your Second Amendment Supporting U.S. Born Citizen And Constituent (your name)

Just more fuel being added to the fire:angry:! They just don't get it!:angry: But, there's 545 of them...and millions of us and that needs no elaboration.
 

American ME!

Armored Saint
RINO Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) in an interview with CNN, shows his support for Anti-Constitution Judge Sotomayor...

Hatch: Sotomayor 'highly likely' to be confirmed, barring surprises - CNN.com

We need to write Senator Hatch and RNC Chairman Michael Steele and let them know RINO's will no longer be tolerated! PERIOD!
Link Removed

Judge Sotomayor clearly does not support the Constitution as it was written and our founding fathers intended...

Contact RNC Chairman Michael Steele:
Link Removed

Orrin Hatch...another turncoat who needs to be remembered in 2010 elections.:angry: I say.....FIRE ALL OF THEM!!:angry:
 

utimmer43

New member
I just received this from a friend in Texas that asked I pass it on, and it looks like we need all the help we can get.

In case you were not aware...

The NRA is giving FREE 1-yr memberships to everyone
who wants to join.
They are trying to build up their membership to fight pending
legislation that impacts our right to keep and bear arms.

It is very important that anti-gun congressmen see how many
people they will have to fight to get their legislation through.

https://www.nrahq.org/nrabonus/accept-membership.asp

PLEASE PASS THIS ON TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW!!!
This can include spouses and children also.
Is there a way to get to this free trial through the NRA website? I am already a member but I would like to pass this on to a couple friends. However I don't want to do so if I can't verify that it is legit. I couldn't find anything on the NRA site related to a free trial membership. I also tried "free trial" and "trial membership" in the search on the site and came up with no results.
 

Bohemian

New member
Obama Picks Sotomayor for Supreme Court
by Larry Pratt

The gloves are off and the mask has been put aside. All of the President’s previous dissimulation to the contrary, he aims to use the Supreme Court to finish off what is left of the Constitution.

Judge Sonia Sotomayor is an Obama lieutenant in his assault against the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

We need to tell each Senator that this will be 1994 all over again. That is the year the Democrats lost control of the Congress when they voted for President Clinton’s gun ban.

Sonia Sotomayor is currently on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second District. There she has racked up an anti-Second Amendment record. Generally she has displayed contempt for the rule of law under the Constitution.

sotomayor.jpg


The Heller decision put the Supreme Court in support of the Constitutional protection of the individual right to keep and bear arms. Sotomayor, a politically correct lover of centralized government power (as long as she is part of the power elite), immediately went into counter-attack mode against the Heller decision.

Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which ruled in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states. What? Well, as she and her cohorts claim, the Supreme Court has not yet incorporated the states under the Second Amendment. Until then, she believes, the Second only applies to the District of Columbia.

This is pure judicial arrogance -- something Sotomayor relishes (as long as she is one of the ruling judges). In fact, protection of the right to keep and bear arms was a major objective for enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment, as recently freed slaves were being disarmed and terrorized in their neighborhoods.

But Sotomayor disdains this important right of individuals, as indicated by an earlier opinion from 2004. In United States v. Sanchez-Villar, she stated that “the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.”

Sotomayor’s Second Amendment views flow naturally from her politically correct views on the law and the role of judges.

Sotomayor thinks that her being a Latina with the appropriate genitalia qualifies her to rule better than “a White male who hasn’t lived that life.” This was the judge’s “learned” opinion delivered in a Cultural Diversity lecture at the University of California (Berkeley) School of Law in 2001. As a politically correct elitist, we can be sure that she will continue to rule against the Second Amendment.

Sotomayor laid bare her raw grasping for power and lack of judicial temperament in a speech given at Duke University in 2005. She made it abundantly clear that she is not interested in applying the law and respecting the meaning of our founder’s words.

“All of the legal funds out there, they’re looking for people with court of appeals experience because the court of appeals is where policy is made,” she told her Duke audience.

Realizing that this did not sound very judicial (even though most judges act on this basis), Sotomayor tried to laugh off her brazen admission: “I know this is on tape and I should never say that, [audience laughing], because we don’t make law – I know. Um, okay. I know, I’m not promoting it, I’m not advocating it.” The audience continued to laugh. They got the joke.

Sotomayor’s joke will be on us and our liberties.

President Obama said he was looking for a judge based on their “empathy.” I have no doubt that is but a more considered rephrasing of Sotomayor’s genitalia philosophy of judging. Absent in all the chatter about Sotomayor is fidelity to the original meaning of the Constitution.

Sotomayor’s judicial philosophy might be best characterized by the Queen of Hearts who proclaimed that “I can believe eight different things before breakfast” -- except, of course, for the true meaning of the “right to keep and bear arms.”

By her own admission she wants her experience to rule from the bench, and thus, it is highly unlikely that her Ivy League, elitist factory background will lead to her “feeling good” about folks owning guns.



http://gunowners.org/

 

tattedupboy

Thank God I'm alive!
No surprise here, nor should there be any reason for alam among us pro 2A advocates. If a pro 2A judge such as Thomas, Scalia, Roberts, or Alito were being replaced by an anti, then we should be concerned. However, since one anti is being replaced by another, the balance of the court has not been changed.
 

New Threads

Members online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,331
Messages
622,495
Members
74,157
Latest member
WolfmanBill
Top