Liberals are melting down on Twitter over the Supreme Courtās decision in a major case involving the Second Amendment.
On Thursday, the court released its opinion in the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen case, which struck down New Yorkās restrictive law, arguing that it violates the Second and Fourth Amendments.
The decision triggered an avalanche of fury as liberals took to Twitter to blast the Supreme Court and suggest that it should be dissolved.
Liberal commentator Keith Olberman wrote, āIt has become necessary to dissolve the Supreme Court of the United States.ā
āThe first step is for a state the ācourtā has now forced guns upon, to ignore this ruling. Great. Youāre a court? Why and how do think you can enforce your rulings?ā he suggested.
Vice President Kamala Harris claimed the ruling ādefies common sense and the Constitution of the United States.ā
Check out more of the freak out below:
https://twitter.com/MollyJongFast/status/1539983743661875202
The case centers around New Yorkās law that required residents to show āproper causeā to obtain a concealed carry permit.
But Justice Clarence Thomas noted in the majority opinion, āNo New York statute defines āproper cause.ā But New York courts have held that an applicant shows proper cause only if he can ādemonstrate a special need for self-protection
distinguishable from that of the general community.'ā
New Yorkās law was ridiculously ambiguous and gave judges too much discretion when it came to deciding whether or not an individual could carry their handgun concealed outside of their home.
In one county, a judge could give someone a concealed carry permit immediately when they get their pistol permit, while in the neighboring county, a judge could simply decide that they would not give out a concealed carry permit except in very specific situations.
Some Twitter users argued that the court is ātone-deafā or didnāt read the room as they noted the recent mass shootings in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas. However, the job of the Supreme Court is not to let public opinion affect its decisions about what the Constitution says. Its job is to look at the laws and determine whether they are Constitutional or not.
And despite the concerns, itās worth noting that 43 states have laws much less restrictive than New Yorkās, and they are not like the Wild West.
The answer is not to ignore the ruling or pack or ādissolveā the court ā whatever that means ā that would just wipe out the courtās legitimacy and probably lead to a cycle of Republicans and Democrats trying to increase the number of justices on the court to overturn decisions they donāt like.
