• cygnus@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Sorry, I don’t endorse opinions like yours who advocate for a rogue Supreme Court that disregards the law and does what it wants. Change the law if you want to ban bump stocks.

    • BajaTacos@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      They literally ruled in one case this term with a fake situation that never happened ( 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis) and then lied about the background facts in another (Kennedy v Bremerton), both in favor of “injured” Christians.

      • cygnus@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        OK, so you want more of the same just because this particular case aligns with your preferences? How about demanding a SC that narrowly does its job without acting like they it gets to decide what the law is?

        • BajaTacos@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          My comment is that this is already a rogue court when the case aligns with their beliefs.

        • takeda@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          It’s actually more of the same in this case as well, this position was just easier to defend.