I don’t normally follow the Supreme Court. It is something that I have begun to do over the last year as focus on the conservative majority came through the popular opinion of fear. I also didn’t hold the same fear as many of the howlers at the moon held. The reality is that although there is certainly a moral subjectiveness that can be applied to the law, in general even so-called “Liberal” justices are fairly conservative. It is the nature of law.

Where many are concerned that a conservative majority will restrict or end abortion, and uphold the 2A, the reality is that though abortion should be legal, it should also be constantly regarded with the idea of: “Ethical enough to hate it, wise enough to understand why it must be legal.” 

The 2A on the other hand should have the scrutiny that it is more difficult to legally operate a vehicle than to legally own a firearm. The 2A has the advantage of being a right and driving a vehicle is not but rights can legally be restricted under reasonable conditions. The argument is further degraded by the willful ignorance of politicians on firearms as well as a direct unwillingness to invest in solutions to the problem vs what the press is telling us is important at the time. Helpful tips:

  • The majority of gun crime is conducted by current criminals
  • The majority of gun crime is performed with illegally obtained firearms

Further, many who are conservative think that if we have a highly liberal court, suddenly we are all wearing hemp, smoking weed, breathing clean air, and drinking clean water at the cost of jobs. Helpful tips:

  • Climate change is real
  • People are dying on an unprecedented scale due to food and clean water scarcity

The list of opinions being published are spanning across political divides (causing much consternation to authoritarians that want to stack the court) and are also directly in favor of the people that politicians are supposed to be serving. Consider:


  • Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L.

Holding: The school district’s decision to suspend student Brandi Levy from the cheerleading team for posting to social media (outside of school hours and away from the school’s campus) vulgar language and gestures critical of the school violates the First Amendment.

  • Caniglia v. Strom

Holding: Neither the holding nor logic of Cady v. Dombrowski justifies the removal of Edward Caniglia’s firearms from his home by police officers under a “community caretaking exception” to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement.

  • Lange v. California

Holding: Under the Fourth Amendment, pursuit of a fleeing misdemeanor suspect does not always or categorically qualify as an exigent circumstance justifying a warrantless entry into a home.

These are only a few of the opinions being published by the highest court in the land. I recommend reading at least the summary of the others as understanding our laws is the first step in knowing what we can do to make people’s lives better from a legal perspective.

Case Information curated from https://scotusblog.com

Comments are closed.