The Greatest Living American

Rightguide

Prof Triggernometry
Joined
Feb 7, 2017
Posts
67,290

The Greatest Living American Issues His Career-Defining Court Opinion​


Josh Hammer
|
Posted: Jun 24, 2022 12:01 AM

On Thursday, the single greatest living American used the occasion of his 74th birthday to remind of his greatness. He did so by issuing the single piece of writing that, at least thus far, best encapsulates and defines his career as one of the most towering constitutionalists in the history of the republic.

It is unfortunate that Justice Clarence Thomas, an intellectual trailblazer of an originalist constitutional interpretive methodology who celebrated his 30-year anniversary on the Supreme Court last fall, had to date failed to pen a Court majority opinion that law students and legal practitioners could readily point to as his signature achievement -- his juridical magnum opus. Much of Thomas' most impactful, and certainly culturally salient, writings have come in dissent. He has of course had ample opportunity to write majority opinions over the span of his illustrious Court tenure, but those majority opinions have typically come in more arcane legal realms, such as habeas corpus.

All of that changed with Thomas' 63-page majority opinion in the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen case, this Supreme Court term's marquee Second Amendment case. Thomas' majority opinion, which came a mere two days after the formal release of Michael Pack and Mark Paoletta's new book, "Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words," extends a natural intellectual arc from his prior writings in this hotly contested jurisprudential area. In 2008, he signed onto the late Justice Antonin Scalia's majority decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, which for the first time in the Court's history established that the Second Amendment secures an individual right to possess a firearm. And he wrote a prolific concurrence in the 2010 McDonald v. City of Chicago case, which "incorporated" the Second Amendment substantive gun-owning right against the 50 states.

But for many years following McDonald, Second Amendment activists were abandoned and hung out to dry. The Court repeatedly denied writs of certiorari in gun cases, refusing to provide unifying clarity as to the scope of the substantive individual "right to keep and bear arms" the Court had secured in Heller and McDonald. Thomas himself frequently dissented from the Court's denials of certiorari, objecting to the Court's post-McDonald treatment of the Second Amendment as a "second-class right."

In Bruen, Thomas was vindicated. The Court invalidated New York state's impermissibly restrictive licensing regime, which required an applicant to demonstrate "proper cause" simply in order to carry a concealed handgun outside the home -- in other words, fulfill the "bear" component of the Second Amendment's textually straightforward "right to keep and bear arms" provision. Many of the post-McDonald "tests" that the lower courts have devised in the absence of the Supreme Court's clarity on the subject, such as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit's infamous "two-step" test that amounts to a mere means-end balancing test justifying a slew of restrictive gun control measures, are now jeopardized. More specifically, the Court's ruling only implicates the "may-issue" concealed carry licensing regimes that are employed by six blue states; "shall-issue" and constitutional carry states, which now predominate due to conservative political victories in this space, are untouched.

More here on the greatest living American:

https://townhall.com/columnists/jos...ues-his-careerdefining-court-opinion-n2609248

Today's Americans are fortunate to have lived in his time.
 
Last edited:
I must have triggered into unconsciousness our resident snowflakes with this one.:D
 
I didn't read the original post because it was too
lengthy, but I did read the comments.

Every comment to this thread shows what a bunch
of ignorant hate filled assholes most of your Politics
Board members are.

Fucking dipshits... Get a life and stop blaming others
for your failure to be a decent human being that
respects the opinions of others.

- Kris Jenner
Guy who doesn't read whines.

Well done

Only question I have is whether it's the OP alt whining or not
 
Last edited:
God Bless the great Justice Thomas, and eternal gratitude to the late President George HW Bush and current President Biden for their roles in elevating this brilliant man to the Supreme Court. Thanks to the OP for starting this thread. Everyone have a blessed Sunday celebrating the Grand Slam victories we achieved this week. 🙏🇺🇸🙏
 
I thought he was going to say it was fucking Hitler, or some shit. Not that his real pick is that far off.

It's obvious, this Russian multi-handled troll has no fucking idea what constitutes a free and just society. Afghanistan, Iran- thease are not the "Free Societies" that Americans want, and if you support that kind of shit, then fuck off back to Afghanistan or Iran and enjoy your twisted idea of "Freedom."

As for Thomas, he is a traitor to the Constitution, Freedom, Liberty, and everything that has made America the just, free, and prosperous society it aspires to be. The sooner he is whisked off the court and into the depths of Hell where he belongs, the better the both the Supreme Courts, and this nation, will be for it. And it can't be soon enough. Someone once posted that he would probably rule in favor of re-legalizing slavery if it ever came before the court, even if it meant he would be whisked away in chains. Because, after all, that was in the Constitution, right?
 

The Greatest Living American Issues His Career-Defining Court Opinion​


Josh Hammer
|
Posted: Jun 24, 2022 12:01 AM

On Thursday, the single greatest living American used the occasion of his 74th birthday to remind of his greatness. He did so by issuing the single piece of writing that, at least thus far, best encapsulates and defines his career as one of the most towering constitutionalists in the history of the republic.

It is unfortunate that Justice Clarence Thomas, an intellectual trailblazer of an originalist constitutional interpretive methodology who celebrated his 30-year anniversary on the Supreme Court last fall, had to date failed to pen a Court majority opinion that law students and legal practitioners could readily point to as his signature achievement -- his juridical magnum opus. Much of Thomas' most impactful, and certainly culturally salient, writings have come in dissent. He has of course had ample opportunity to write majority opinions over the span of his illustrious Court tenure, but those majority opinions have typically come in more arcane legal realms, such as habeas corpus.

All of that changed with Thomas' 63-page majority opinion in the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen case, this Supreme Court term's marquee Second Amendment case. Thomas' majority opinion, which came a mere two days after the formal release of Michael Pack and Mark Paoletta's new book, "Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words," extends a natural intellectual arc from his prior writings in this hotly contested jurisprudential area. In 2008, he signed onto the late Justice Antonin Scalia's majority decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, which for the first time in the Court's history established that the Second Amendment secures an individual right to possess a firearm. And he wrote a prolific concurrence in the 2010 McDonald v. City of Chicago case, which "incorporated" the Second Amendment substantive gun-owning right against the 50 states.

But for many years following McDonald, Second Amendment activists were abandoned and hung out to dry. The Court repeatedly denied writs of certiorari in gun cases, refusing to provide unifying clarity as to the scope of the substantive individual "right to keep and bear arms" the Court had secured in Heller and McDonald. Thomas himself frequently dissented from the Court's denials of certiorari, objecting to the Court's post-McDonald treatment of the Second Amendment as a "second-class right."

In Bruen, Thomas was vindicated. The Court invalidated New York state's impermissibly restrictive licensing regime, which required an applicant to demonstrate "proper cause" simply in order to carry a concealed handgun outside the home -- in other words, fulfill the "bear" component of the Second Amendment's textually straightforward "right to keep and bear arms" provision. Many of the post-McDonald "tests" that the lower courts have devised in the absence of the Supreme Court's clarity on the subject, such as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit's infamous "two-step" test that amounts to a mere means-end balancing test justifying a slew of restrictive gun control measures, are now jeopardized. More specifically, the Court's ruling only implicates the "may-issue" concealed carry licensing regimes that are employed by six blue states; "shall-issue" and constitutional carry states, which now predominate due to conservative political victories in this space, are untouched.

More here on the greatest living American:

https://townhall.com/columnists/jos...ues-his-careerdefining-court-opinion-n2609248

Today's Americans are fortunate to have lived in his time.


Nancy Pelosi: "Such a contradiction: Yesterday the States cannot make laws governing the right to bear arms. And today they're saying the reverse: that the States can overturn a constitutional right -- for 50 years, of having the right to choose. Their hypocrisy is outraging. ."
 
May, that's at least the third time I've seen this same exact post this morning and I'll say the same damned thing, guns are in the Constitution, abortion is not. It was discovered by a judge who was legislating from the bench (Constitutionally Illegal) in a penumbra.
 
PS: Nancy Pelosi has always been a dim bulb (who was hot when she was young and her hotness earned her great latitude) and now she's getting senile on top of it. Do not rely upon her for interpretations of the Constitution or the intent of the Founders.
 
May, that's at least the third time I've seen this same exact post this morning and I'll say the same damned thing, guns are in the Constitution, abortion is not. It was discovered by a judge who was legislating from the bench (Constitutionally Illegal) in a penumbra.
There is no mention of "guns" nor "firearms" in the constitution. ;)
 
No but your bigotry is showing everyone knows the greatest living american is Jennifer Lopez.
What bigotry? Jennifer Lopez? Leaving her musical ability aside and the width of her haunches, what has she contributed to the legacy of the country? Just askin'.:D
 
God Bless the great Justice Thomas, and eternal gratitude to the late President George HW Bush and current President Biden for their roles in elevating this brilliant man to the Supreme Court. Thanks to the OP for starting this thread. Everyone have a blessed Sunday celebrating the Grand Slam victories we achieved this week. 🙏🇺🇸🙏
Justice Thomas has been a hero of mine since the day he jacked up the Senate Committee On The Judiciary. It was there that both Thomas and Thomas Sowell schooled Joe Biden and forever identified his ignorance of the law and his racial bias.
 
PS: Nancy Pelosi has always been a dim bulb (who was hot when she was young and her hotness earned her great latitude) and now she's getting senile on top of it. Do not rely upon her for interpretations of the Constitution or the intent of the Founders.
Yeah her hotness now covers her belly button.:D
 
Nancy Pelosi: "Such a contradiction: Yesterday the States cannot make laws governing the right to bear arms. And today they're saying the reverse: that the States can overturn a constitutional right -- for 50 years, of having the right to choose. Their hypocrisy is outraging. ."
There is no hypocrisy. The Constitution does not enumerate or protect a right of abortion at the federal level. It does however enumerate and protect the "right to bear arms" and the "unqualified command" that it "shall not be infringed." Hence:

"The government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only then may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.” Konigsberg, 366 U. S., at 50, n. 10."
 
What bigotry? Jennifer Lopez? Leaving her musical ability aside and the width of her haunches, what has she contributed to the legacy of the country? Just askin'.:D
That's what makes her the greatest American that ass duh
 
How dare you sir disparage the most perfect rump of all time. I've turned your information over to the proper authorities. They will be conducting a mental health check you are obviously in some distress.
 
How dare you sir disparage the most perfect rump of all time. I've turned your information over to the proper authorities. They will be conducting a mental health check you are obviously in some distress.
All "rumps" exist on their own bell curve of age. There is the beginning, a long climb to the pinnacle of perfection, and a downhill run on the other side. Unfortunately, Jen's butt having passed its pinnacle is now gaining velocity in a hair-straightening slide into lipedemic hell. So no. I am in no distress. Being a happy but competent observer of exquisite butt I've come to notice with sadness the toll of time all women must pay. Fortunately for men, it comes to women at a much earlier age than it does for men, enabling us to pursue and participate in the sport much later in life than women. :D ;)
 
Back
Top