I'm not sure why this is worth 6 pages of discussion.
The Justice Department filed the briefs. Trump didn't sit down and write them. I doubt he knew about them. They were drafted between January and the end of April. (See the SCOTUS docket timeline for more info.) They clearly weren't a follow-up to his comments about not liking silencers since they were filed in the first week of May, about a month before Trump shot off his mouth. As far as I can tell, Trump's input into these cases was zero.
Besides, y'all are talking like you think US v. Lopez reversed Wickard v. Filburn. That's just wishful thinking. The Kansas cases were doomed from the start and are, in the big picture, meaningless. (Yeah, I know those weren't the cited precedents and the issues were a little different. Still, I wonder how many people here have actually read the Kettler brief? You might find it informative. The Cox brief was more of the same and filed even earlier; feel free to read it, too.)
Unless, of course, Kansas follows through. The same Kansas law that says "these things somehow magically are not touched by the Commerce Clause" (Almost everything is, btw.) also provides that it is a state felony for any government agent to enforce the NFA in cases like this. If Kansas arrests, jails, tries, and convicts a few ATF employees, then we'll know they mean business.
That's not going to happen. If it did, they'd lose on appeal and some state LEOs would wind up in federal prison.
If Kansas doesn't arrest some ATF employees, then you know that the whole law was a wink and a nod to gun owners and even the lawmakers who voted for it didn't really think anyone would be stupid enough to risk their freedom on its application.
That law, this case, this thread - it's all much ado about nothing.
It's all political theater for the gullible.
The Justice Department filed the briefs. Trump didn't sit down and write them. I doubt he knew about them. They were drafted between January and the end of April. (See the SCOTUS docket timeline for more info.) They clearly weren't a follow-up to his comments about not liking silencers since they were filed in the first week of May, about a month before Trump shot off his mouth. As far as I can tell, Trump's input into these cases was zero.
Besides, y'all are talking like you think US v. Lopez reversed Wickard v. Filburn. That's just wishful thinking. The Kansas cases were doomed from the start and are, in the big picture, meaningless. (Yeah, I know those weren't the cited precedents and the issues were a little different. Still, I wonder how many people here have actually read the Kettler brief? You might find it informative. The Cox brief was more of the same and filed even earlier; feel free to read it, too.)
Unless, of course, Kansas follows through. The same Kansas law that says "these things somehow magically are not touched by the Commerce Clause" (Almost everything is, btw.) also provides that it is a state felony for any government agent to enforce the NFA in cases like this. If Kansas arrests, jails, tries, and convicts a few ATF employees, then we'll know they mean business.
That's not going to happen. If it did, they'd lose on appeal and some state LEOs would wind up in federal prison.
If Kansas doesn't arrest some ATF employees, then you know that the whole law was a wink and a nod to gun owners and even the lawmakers who voted for it didn't really think anyone would be stupid enough to risk their freedom on its application.
That law, this case, this thread - it's all much ado about nothing.
It's all political theater for the gullible.
