A federal appeals judge released a firearms demonstration recorded in his room on YouTube, explaining how his colleagues live in a “fantasy of facts” in a major second amendment lawsuit.
Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit Reconfirm The ban found that it did not violate the Second Amendment as California supports previous support for the magazine, which holds more than 10 rounds on Thursday. In his opposition, Trump-appointed Judge Lawrence Vandick linked his work. video He uses personal shooting equipment to counter the logic of the majority.
“It’s very easy to demonstrate the conceptual failure of the new test for the majority, which allows even cavemen with just video recorders and firearms to do that,” Vandyke disagreed.
supreme court Instructions Court considering previous decisions in light of 2022 Arbitration In the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association vs. Blueen, the Supreme Court held that firearm restrictions must match the country’s history and the tradition of firearm control. (Related: Exclusive: GOP Senator wants to make sure Biden’s “illegal” gun registration is dead.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmc7ntdd4d4c
“The logic of the majority assumes the assumption that there is a platonic ideal for firearms. If you think that the judge is the platonic guardian of the second amendment, I think it makes sense,” writes Vandice. “If you can get it, that’s great work, but it should be clear now that many judges (and the government of the barrel) don’t know anything about how it actually works.
A majority in the 9th Circuit discovered that the large-capacity magazines were neither weapons nor protected accessories. Even if the Second Amendment covers “optional accessories,” the ruling states that the ban ” falls under the national tradition of protecting innocent people by banning particularly dangerous use of weapons and regulating the components required for firearms.”
Vandyke was one of 20 potential Supreme Court candidates Trump Included On the September 2020 list.
Some of his colleagues were not grateful for Vandice’s unique presentation to the contrary. For example, Judge Marsha Belzon, appointed by former President Bill Clinton, accused the video of “very inappropriate.”
“Judge Vandice essentially appointed himself as an expert witness in this case, and provided an explicit presentation of convincing readers of their views of fact without complying with the experts and the procedural safeguards that apply to their testimony, and also serving the panel at the same time, writing to the panel where five judges accused.
Vandyke replied that the real concern of the majority would not mask his video “their invented constitutional tests are clearly based on fantasies of fact.”
“Don’t shoot messengers just to show that this reality doesn’t exist,” he wrote.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation is an independent, nonpartisan newswire service that is free to use for legitimate news publishers that can provide large audiences. All republished articles must include logos, reporter signatures and DCNF affiliation. For questions regarding our guidelines or partnerships with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
