Daily Archives: October 21, 2023

SCOTUS Does Not Reinstate Missouri’s Nutjob Gun Law

Posted on by

Here’s an update on Missouri’s infamous Second Amendment Preservation Act, which went into effect in June 2021. The Act is a not-well-veiled attempt at nullifying federal guns laws. This NPR article explains it pretty well:

In 2021, Missouri passed the “Second Amendment Preservation Act” to make federal gun restrictions illegal in the state and bar officials from enforcing any law that would “infringe” upon the right to “bear arms.” It also allows “any person” to sue state law-enforcement agencies who don’t comply with state law.

The federal government sued, contending that the state law unconstitutionally usurped federal law and made it impossible for federal authorities in the state to carry out their enforcement duties. A federal district court agreed and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the ruling.

In effect, the law seriously interfered with cooperation between state and federal law enforcement where guns are involved. For example, after a police officer was killed in a shootout, state law enforcement at first refused to work with federal agencies to trace the murder weapon.

Among other things, the law attempts to nullify federal statutes that, for example, require gun dealers to keep records. It prohibits the state from hiring former federal employees who had ever been involved in enforcing federal gun laws. And it allows any citizen of the state to sue any state law enforcement employee or agency caught cooperating with the feds, for $50,000. Ian Millhiser at Vox said the law “reads like it was drafted by a member of the John Birch Society after a night of heavy drinking.”

In 2022 the U.S. Department of Justice filed a brief in a federal court against the law. The brief says the law “poses a clear and substantial threat to public safety” and has “seriously impaired the federal government’s ability to combat violent crime in Missouri.”

The state is still appealing to have the law reinstated in lower courts. But then the Missouri AG asked the Supreme Court to reinstate the law while the challenges were working their way through lower courts. And yesterday the Court refused to do that. Justice Thomas dissented.

Adam Liptak writes for the New York Times (no paywall):

In a brief statement on Friday, Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, joined by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., wrote that he agreed with the court’s ruling “under the present circumstances.” But he added that the court was powerless to block aspects of the Missouri law that resembled the one from Texas.

Judge Brian C. Wimes of the Federal District Court in Kansas City ruled in March that the Missouri law was “an impermissible nullification attempt” at odds with the Constitution’s supremacy clause, which generally prohibits states from enacting measures at odds with federal law.

I wonder if the “under the present circumstances” is leaving a door open for the court to rule differently at some future time.

In other news: James Comer’s investigations into Joe Biden’s allegedly shady financial dealings are still striking out. Biden’s brother James wrote him a check for $200,000 in 2018, which was designated a “loan replayment.” This is Comer’s new evidence of Biden’s doing something bad somehow that is all over right-wing media, sometimes under headlines screaming QUID PRO QUO. None appear to remember that Biden was a private citizen in 2018, and why wouldn’t it have been a loan replayment?

Also, too: House Majority Whip Tom Emmer of Minnesota is being considered for the speaker position. But back in January 2021 Emmer voted to certify the 2020 election results. So “conservatives aligned with Trump, including their media darling Tucker Carlson, are lining up to crush Emmer’s bid for speaker if he decides to run,” it says here. I can’t imagine how the House is ever going to elect a speaker unless some Dems cross over and vote for a not-MAGA Republican.