Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was Joe Biden’s pick for the Supreme Court.
Biden only picked Jackson because of her race and gender.
Ketanji Brown Jackson is plotting her revenge, and this scheme will terrify everyone.
The Supreme Court handed down a 9-0 decision in Hemani v. United States that the government couldn’t ban habitual marijuana users from owning firearms.
Justice Neil Gorsuch, who wrote the opinion, made it clear that this was a narrow ruling that only applied to Americans who smoked marijuana.
Jackson laid down her marker that her ultimate goal is to erase the Second Amendment from the Constitution.
In her dissent, Brown-Jackson slammed the 2022 New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen decision, which held that any gun control laws had to fit within America’s history and tradition of defending the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, calling it “unworkable.”
“I write separately to emphasize that means-end scrutiny—the approach courts applied before we adopted Bruen’s ‘history and tradition’ metric—offers a more rational way of assessing the constitutionality of firearm regulations,” Brown-Jackson wrote. “As I and others have elsewhere explained, Bruen is unworkable.”
Jackson argued for returning to the “strict scrutiny” standard the court employed before Bruen.
“Applying means-end scrutiny to firearm restrictions like the 18 U. S. C. §922(g)(3) prosecution before us would be straightforward,” Jackson added. “We would be tasked with answering familiar questions: How severe is the law’s burden on Second Amendment rights? Does the government have a strong interest in preventing firearm possession by those who pose a special danger of misuse? And is §922(g)(3)’s ban on firearm possession by unlawful users of marijuana sufficiently tailored to that interest?”
“I opine only on the mechanics of the means-ends test; what result that test would produce here is not before us, since neither party asks us to overturn Bruen and apply means-ends scrutiny,” Brown-Jackson went on to write.
Disagreements sometimes end up as majority opinions if the composition of the court changes.
If Democrats win in 2026 and 2028, they will pack the Supreme Court, and one of the first holdings the new leftist majority will overturn is Bruen.
Second Amendment Foundation Director of Legal Research and Education, Konstantinos Moros, explained to The Daily Caller why Jackson was so eager to reimpose the “strict scrutiny” standard.
That’s because, from the 2008 Heller case, which established the Second Amendment as a fundamental right, to Bruen. The court didn’t overturn a single gun control statute.
“The Jackson and Sotomayor concurrence complains that Bruen is ‘unworkable’ while calling for a return to a standard (means-end scrutiny) that was actually unworkable,” Moros stated. “As just one example, from when Heller was decided in 2008 until Bruen was decided in 2022, the Ninth Circuit did not strike down a single gun law even though it heard dozens of cases.”
“It was a test that even more strongly favored the government and drifted massively from the original intent behind the adoption of the Second Amendment,” Moros concluded. “Perhaps that’s what Justice Jackson and Sotomayor would prefer, but it was not a ‘workable’ status quo for a meaningful Second Amendment.”
Conservative Reboot will keep you up to date on any new developments in this ongoing story and other breaking news in politics. Please bookmark our site, make it your homepage, and share our content with your friends on social media and by email.