Early on Fox I saw that there is talk of a Supreme Court Justice retiring this summer.   If we get another conservative judge on is it more likely to have nfa over turned as unconstitutional, than to have the HPA passed, and other Firearm type laws repealed?

If you think the Supreme court or any of the members on it really give a fuck about the Constitution...You have another thing coming.

They are just as corruptible as an elected official.

Also, Clarence is getting old and probably wants to go away.

The supreme court has far too much power and weighs to heavily in our government. We need real, constitutional fixes for the progressive problem.

-Limit legislative terms
-limit Judge terms
-Limit the Court power
-No more mandatory spending
-Budget must be passed. If a budget isn't passed, the previous year budget will be adopted with 10% cut to everything
-nullify the 14th,16th, 17th amendment.
-Return senators to the state, to be elected by state representative.*Give states back their power*
-Citizenship should not be based on where you are born, rather who you are born to and whether or not you accept that citizenship at 18.

I'm not legal scholar. I am sure there are kinks that need to be worked out. However, this is just a pipe dream. No one wants a constitutional government. They want handouts, favors, special rights..on both sides...

Don't believe me? Talk about entitlement reform. Specifically Social Security.

Bravo....

The NFA will never be overturned as unconstitutional. If you had nine Clarence Thomases, at least five would vote to uphold it.

it will take a massive turnover of elected officials in congress that are extremely conservative to even consider it, because the law needs to be repealed, even then I don't think it will happen

None of that is ever happening. Sorry.

There are three Justices who really do try to uphold the Constitution.

Unfortunately it takes the vote of five to hear a case.

And then there is Steri Decisis, which is the SCOTUS doctrine of not overturning prior decisions.

With five Constitutionalist Justices a lot of BS decisions would be revisited and overturned. Trump may get two more SCOTUS nomination. If so, and they are in the mold of Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch, there is hope.

We still need to see how Gorsuch does in his new role.

I expect a constitutional argument out of him.  But we will see this June.

@cttb

Care to back that claim up or you just giving your uneducated opinion on the man?

Its not a big issue with voters or elected officials.  Dont expect it to ever gain traction.  It would take a majority of elected officials getting interested in shooting and NFA ownership to make any traction. And we aint there yet.

You are all delusional if you think politicians or judges want to take their own power away and give freedom back to the people.

It's a joke using absurdity and overstatement to illustrate several points. First, having nine Clarence Thomases is impossible. Next, even if you had nine Clarence Thomases, presumably they would all vote the same way since they're the same person. The notion that five of the Clarence Thomases would vote to uphold the NFA and four would vote to overturn it is a jab at the fact that Supreme Court justices drive political agendas, while giving a nod to the fact that Clarence Thomas is the strictest Constitutionalist we've ever had.

Maybe 1% of the population even knows what NFA is, let alone cares about it.  It's been on the books 83 years.  It's not going anywhere.

MY MAN (Like Denzel Washington would say it)

It would be trivial to start by staffing up the NFA branch so the wait times are weeks instead of years.  




Oh wait....
http://www.guns.com/2017/04/13/atf-announces-nfa-branch-reorganization/

Let's see, even the great Scalia left some room in Heller for some restrictions on firearms. 

So I think no, the Supreme Court will never overturn the NFA in whole as unconstitutional. 

We'll never get 5 justices more conservative and originalist than Scalia. 

I see OP just got his medical marijuana card.  He's high AF.

He doesn't need a card if he's in CA. Just hit and enjoy.

A.W.D.

Social Security is not an entitlement.  I paid into it and expect to get it back.  With interest.

Are you entitled to more than you paid in?

What about SS ? a bullshit Ponzi scheme we were forced to participate in, With the promise the money would be there when we were to receive it, in stead it was pissed away and given to every loser who never paid a dime into it.
Oh don't call it an entitlement that is a bullshit term used by the media.

!!!BAM!!!
...and in before the SS apologists...

ETA; too late

I would be thrilled if they overturned the Hughes amendment, even if they decided to keep the NFA.

Even best case, a liberal voluntarily retires and allows themself to be replaced by Trump's choice (which will never happen), the court would be 4 conservatives, 3 liberals, and 2 unreliable swing voters.

That's no where near the makeup you want for an NFA challenge.