Robert Hubbell finds consequences in Supreme's Gun Love.
Last edited Wed Jul 6, 2022, 10:27 AM - Edit history (1)
[link:https://roberthubbell.substack.com/p/real-world-consequence|
" Over the past three decades, Justices Thomas, Alito, and Roberts protected the right of anti-abortion protesters to harass women entering medical clinics. Last month, those justices were joined by Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Gorsuch in protecting the right of every American to carry a weapon in public. Protesters have now gathered near the homes of justices to peacefully protest the decision in Dobbs. Predictably, some protesters are armed—as is now their right under Bruen (allowing universal concealed carry for self-defense).
The justices were offended and frightened by the sight of armed protestors near their homes. They apparently believe that the First and Second Amendments do not apply to protesters directing their speech toward the justices. So, the Marshal of the Supreme Court demanded that governors in Maryland and Virginia stop the peaceful protests. The request from a federal official demanding action by state law enforcement is, to say the least, irregular. But let’s put that problem of federalism aside for the moment and reflect on the irony of the request from the justices.
One of the pro-Trump governors who received the demand from the Supreme Court Marshal responded by pointing out that his state lacked—wait for it—constitutional authority to stop the protests. See Joe Patrice in Above the Law, Supreme Court Officials SHOCKED To Learn That Supreme Court Rules Apply To The Supreme Court. As Patrice notes in his article, the Supreme Court Marshal did not act on her own; she was directed by a justice (or justices) who should have a passing familiarity with the Constitution.
In Dobbs, Alito wrote that the Court could not—and should not—consider the real-world consequences of stripping women of the constitutional liberty to control their reproductive choices. (“This Court has neither the authority nor the expertise to adjudicate . . . conflicting arguments about the effects of the abortion right on the lives of women.”) Having turned their backs on the real-world “effects” of their decisions, the justices should not be surprised when their decisions puncture the comfortable bubble that typically insulates them from the chaos of “the little people” who must live under the scourge of the Court’s decisions."
= new reply since forum marked as read
They had no idea how this ruling might affect society. 
They also, apparently, have no idea that they exist in society. The protests at their homes is my absolute favorite example this week of "fuck around and find out".
"If the governors of their state can't provide protection, I think there's room at gitmo".
