Democratic New Mexico Governor Temporarily Bans Guns!

[Reagan]

Interesting how none of our liberal brethern here has said anything about this. 

Anyway, she should be impeached and possibly put in prison.  It's been stated she has committed 1 to 2 felonies by doing this!

As a side note:  Haven't heard a word from the normal anti-gun bunch such as Newsome, Whitmer and the Joebama Administration.  Could this be some sort of trial balloon?  And why only 30 days?  Thoughts?!

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[baddog]

11 minutes ago, Reagan said:

Interesting how none of our liberal brethern here has said anything about this. 

Anyway, she should be impeached and possibly put in prison.  It's been stated she has committed 1 to 2 felonies by doing this!

As a side note:  Haven't heard a word from the normal anti-gun bunch such as Newsome, Whitmer and the Joebama Administration.  Could this be some sort of trial balloon?  And why only 30 days?  Thoughts?!

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

It’s unconstitutional and this sheriff says he won’t enforce it. I’m sure there are more just like him. 
 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[baddog]

New Mexico Democrat governor's sweeping gun order hits major temporary roadblock

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

Explore the Fox News apps that are right for you at

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[BS Wildcats]

15 minutes ago, baddog said:

New Mexico Democrat governor's sweeping gun order hits major temporary roadblock

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

Explore the Fox News apps that are right for you at

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

More proof that Democrats are idiots!!

[tvc184]

That did not take long.

A federal district judge in New Mexico has enjoined (issued an injunction) the governor’s order. The judge said this clearly violates the Constitution in NYSRPA v. Bruen and DC v. Heller.

What may be interesting in the YouTube video that I watched, one of the governor’s lawyers argued that the US Supreme Court was wrong in NYSRPA v. Bruen. This was basically asking a district judge in New Mexico to override the Supreme Court.  Uhhhhh…… first year constitutional law perhaps? Having never been to law school, maybe one of the lawyers in this forum can chime in on precedents set by the Supreme Court and if a federal district judge can simply overturn Supreme Court  precedent. I understand a district judge or Circuit Court of Appeals trying to interpret what Supreme Court said which is way different than saying, ignore the Supreme Court. According to the video I watched, in the oral arguments the federal judge shut down that tactic, saying that the inferior court’s job was to uphold precedent set by the Supreme Court. The inferior courts are any federal courts that are not the Supreme Court. For example, the federal District Courts in Beaumont are inferior courts. An appeal from there to the Fifth Circuit Court in New Orleans, is also an inferior court.

In any case, at least for the moment, the governor’s emergency order has been suspended. It seems they may be grasping at straws and know they are on thin ice if they are asking a federal judge to ignore the Supreme Court. I know that lawyers will use any legal tactic or argument possible for their client and I agree, but this seems like being ridiculous.

In my opinion…..

[tvc184]

😀

I didn’t read baddog’s and BS Wildcat’s posts before I started typing away….

[tvc184]

It is very potential that this judge may have done a great service to the pro 2A community.

She has now started the ball rolling and it may end up badly for a future anti-2A tactics.

The main question is, can a governor in a declared emergency, overcome a person’s constitutional rights and/or, is safety or seriousness of an issue a valid reason to do the same.

This is my non-lawyer opinion about how this might play out.

NM will not go quietly into the night and will appeal this to the 10th Circuit Court which covers NM, OK, UT, WY, CO and KS.

The 10th Circuit will hear the oral arguments to agree with the district judge or overturn the injunction and allow the governor’s order to suspend the 2A to stand. This will not be hearing the full case but just an issue on the temporary injunction.

My belief that if this is appealed to the circuit court, they will uphold the judge and the injunction.

 The next step would be to appeal the actual authority of the governor to the 10th Circuit. That would be to argue, a governor, when declaring emergency can lawfully issue such orders suspending a constitutional right.

If it goes that far, the 10th Circuit will set precedent in those 6 states that a governor has no such authority to ban guns in public. That precedent will technically only have legal bearing in those 6 states.

The next and final step would be for losing side to appeal to the United States. Again, I suspect that the 10th Circuit will find the governor’s actions unconstitutional. If that happens to be the outcome, the US Supreme Court will deny review (certiorari or cert.) and allow the 10th Circuit ruling to stand, setting precedent. 

If the 10th Circuit sides with the governor’s authority to issue such an edict, the Supreme Court will accept the case for review and overturn it, again setting precedent. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[tvc184]

On 9/13/2023 at 7:00 PM, tvc184 said:

It is very potential that this judge may have done a great service to the pro 2A community.

She has now started the ball rolling and it may end up badly for a future anti-2A tactics.

The main question is, can a governor in a declared emergency, overcome a person’s constitutional rights and/or, is safety or seriousness of an issue a valid reason to do the same.

This is my non-lawyer opinion about how this might play out.

NM will not go quietly into the night and will appeal this to the 10th Circuit Court which covers NM, OK, UT, WY, CO and KS.

The 10th Circuit will hear the oral arguments to agree with the district judge or overturn the injunction and allow the governor’s order to suspend the 2A to stand. This will not be hearing the full case but just an issue on the temporary injunction.

My belief that if this is appealed to the circuit court, they will uphold the judge and the injunction.

 The next step would be to appeal the actual authority of the governor to the 10th Circuit. That would be to argue, a governor, when declaring emergency can lawfully issue such orders suspending a constitutional right.

If it goes that far, the 10th Circuit will set precedent in those 6 states that a governor has no such authority to ban guns in public. That precedent will technically only have legal bearing in those 6 states.

The next and final step would be for losing side to appeal to the United States. Again, I suspect that the 10th Circuit will find the governor’s actions unconstitutional. If that happens to be the outcome, the US Supreme Court will deny review (certiorari or cert.) and allow the 10th Circuit ruling to stand, setting precedent. 

If the 10th Circuit sides with the governor’s authority to issue such an edict, the Supreme Court will accept the case for review and overturn it, again setting precedent. 

I guess the Democrat operatives are reading my comments … 😂😂😂

I said she started the ball rolling and this might be a very good case to slam anti-gun carry laws and claims of emergency orders taking away rights.

 She must have gotten the word behind closed doors to back off before you kill the anti-gun movement. So the governor has not appeared to back down but has withdrawn her original order and modified it radically.

So as to not appear that she is giving up and was a victim of a vicious first round knockout, she has now said that people can carry guns in public…. just not in parks and playgrounds.

Boy, that’ll stop the gang killings!!! 

Make no mistake, she was in position to give a landmark victory to the 2A. Now she is going to claim it is a moot point and the courts should not issue a ruling. Any future arguments from her ban will not be (she hopes) over sweeping authority to suspend rights but to use that authority only for “sensitive places” which was mentioned in Bruen.

I believe the sensitive places in Bruen refers to things like in courtrooms, city council meetings, etc. She is now hoping that the courts will rule that in city parks people lose the right of self defense and the 2A. Even if it gets that far, it will not be nearly so damaging as far as a court ruling on emergency powers to suspend rights.