Even the ACLU supports this change- the law as-is discriminates and denies due process rights
https://waysandmeans.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/ACLU.pdf
The law as changed a few years ago assumes that if you have a representative payee for your social security that means you are automatically mentally defective under the law, and uses that to blanket deny people exercise of rights.
The problem is this simply is not true. There are plenty of people who are fully mentally fit who have a family member listed as a representative payee because they manage their finances for convenience sake or for other reasons. You don't get an mental evaluation of any form when applying to have designated your payee.
So with a quick policy change they blanket denied tens of thousands of people the ability to exercise their rights based on a flawed assumption. With no due process, no hearings, no warning.
I don't get how anyone who considers themselves a progressive could support that. Yeah, it has to do with guns, and I get that many here have situational ethics where they treat exercise of rights they don't like differently. But think about the president this sets- today they deny this right based on flimsy reasoning with no due process, what is to stop Trump from down the road saying "well these people can't even handle their own finances no way they can handle the responsibility of being and informed voter" and with the same kind of policy change swipe away the right to vote.
Just because you don't like a certain right doesn't mean we should be applauding when it's taken away without any due process from a lot of people who legally don't meet the criteria to be denied it.
Those who are actually mentally ill still can and should have the right removed- but do it the right way that the law provides for with a hearing and due process rights, not with a blanket assumption that "well if you are having someone else handle you SS finances you must be a dangerously mentally ill person".