Oh, So That's Who Signed Off on the FBI Spy Operation Into the...
Chuck Schumer Is About to Be Taken Behind the Barn Over This Tweet
Watch Trump Roast a Reporter Over This Silly Question About the East Room...
Trump Just Called Off Planned Immigration 'Surge' In This City – for Now
Trump Administration Is Preparing Unprecedented Action Against Drug Cartels
Letitia James' ICE Snitch Line Will Backfire on Democrats
The 'Unbiased' Jon Karl Has Another Anti-Trump Book Coming Out, and Trump's Tearing...
Some Democrats Are Sour on Mandela Barnes Running for Wisconsin Governor
Another Day, Another Blow to Platner's Image
Anti-ICE Protestor Who Called for Violence a 'Human Rights Award' Winner
Michael Wolff Launches Lawsuit Against Melania Trump After Refusal to Retract Epstein Comm...
Candace Owens Hits a New Low, and Accuses Trump of Assassinating Charlie Kirk
Eric Adams Endorses Andrew Cuomo
Trump Says Ford, General Motors Thanked Him for Tariffs on Mid, Large-Size Trucks
ICE Arrests Two Illegal Alien Fugitives Wanted for Murder of Texas Woman
Tipsheet
Premium

DOJ Re-Evaluating Some of Its Litigation Positions on Gun Cases

AP Photo/Ben Curtis

There are a lot of gun cases working their way through the judicial system. Most of them stem from issues with various states, but that's not all of them. After all, with four years of the anti-gun Biden administration running rampant, stomping on the right to keep and bear arms, there are still plenty of federal cases as well.

President Donald Trump, though, ran as pro-gun. We had expectations, and there's another hint that the Pam Bondi-era DOJ has gotten the memo.

Sure, she's made it so some people can get their gun rights restored and there have been other pro-gun moves as well, but her chief of staff said something on X Monday morning that ups the game entirely.

Traditionally, it seems that when administrations change, the arguments already in place in legal challenges are left untouched. At least, that's been my observation, though I can't claim to have done any in-depth study of the topic.

We already saw the Bondi DOJ ask for a 30-day delay on a case involving suppressors so it could re-evaluate its stance on the issue--the previous position had been that suppressors weren't arms and thus not covered by the Second Amendment--so this is really along the same lines.

It's just good to see that at least some other cases are going to get a second look to see if the government's position is as blatantly unconstitutional as what we've seen in the past.

And this is big.

If the DOJ takes the position that yes, these laws are actually infringements, it's going to be difficult for even the most anti-gun judge to make the case that the laws in question should be upheld. I'm not saying they won't try it, but as it moves up the judicial chain, that's going to be harder and harder to get away with.

What can happen is the complete destruction of the gun control apparatus at the federal level, possibly in such a way that it throttles state gun control efforts as well. That's the best-case scenario, admittedly.

The worst case, though, is that these cases are decided fairly narrowly but are still ultimately coming down on the pro-gun side of things.

However, there are still questions.

For example, it's clear that they're only taking a second look at some litigation positions on guns, not all of them. There's also no guarantee that they'll change anything. Taking a look is a good thing but it's far from enough on its own.

What we need is action. I sincerely hope that is coming in the near future; that this is a first step toward restoring our right to keep and bear arms.

Until then, seeing the heads of the anti-gunners explode is going to be glorious enough all on its own that I'll probably be kept busy laughing at them for days and days.

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement