Open Minds
How to listen
Before we can learn, we need to have an open mind. A mind ready to learn new things. To unlearn old things. To ask questions and evaluate answers.
If we are not willing to question what we think we know, or if we are starting from a set stance, we do not have an open mind.
Having an open mind does not mean a willingness to accept garbage, but it does require us to ask if it is garbage.
Holocaust Denial
Years ago I ran into Holocaust denial for the first time. It was shocking to me because I knew what happened to the Jews and other undesirables during WWII by the Nazis.
How could somebody deny that it happened?
So I asked a simple question: How do I know it happened?
The answer was that my elders told me so. These were my teachers and my history books.
Could they all be wrong?
This was in the early days of the Internet, so it was a little more difficult, but I found a couple of sites documenting why the Holocaust was fake and a few others that were debunking the deniers.
I compared these sites, and the first thing I noticed was citations to external, primary sources. The deniers made many claims, but there were not very many links to back those claims up. On the other hand, the debunkers’ site was full of references to primary sources.
When I did look at the primary sources, I found that my personal evaluation of that evidence matched what the debunkers were saying.
The deniers told me that all those sources were lying to me. But I could see the images. I could examine the images for altercations and to see if they were faked. I didn’t find anything in the primary sources or the debunker sites that even suggested altercations or fabrications.
This was not true of the denier’s site. Their primary sources did not support their conclusions.
The other thing that I quickly spotted was a comparison between ethical, reasonable, modern actions vs. wartime evil operations.
For example, they claimed that the trains could not transport that many people. But they based that on human treatment of the people stuffed into the cars. There was no indication of such human treatment. Those being transported to the extermination camps were stuffed into those cars with no room to move.
There are multiple accounts of people standing next to dead people who couldn’t fall to the ground. They were held up by the crush of humanity around them.
Finally, the deniers made a claim that a sample they stole proved that the levels of cyanide in the showers were not high enough to cause death in humans. Except that the sample they stole had been exposed to the elements for over 50 years. The values they used for LD50 were appropriate for insects, not humans.
After my research, I had personally determined that the Holocaust did take place and the deniers were sacks of shit for attempting to deny something so evil.
Before I could make that determination, I had to open my mind to the possibility.
Lies
People lie. You can’t escape it. As thinking humans, we are pretty good at detecting people who are lying to us. But that only works when dealing with average people.
We have all chuckled at the videos of children lying about something when they are covered in the cake frosting of their misdeed. A child will flat out deny they ate the cake while covered in frosting.
They have not learned the guile of how to lie.
This is the simplest type of lie: to simply say something not true. “Did you eat the cake?” “No, Mommy!”
Most people move past this method rather quickly.
The next place that people go is to deny knowledge or to exaggerate. “Did you eat the cake?” “What cake?” or “Just a teeny tiny piece.”
There is an entire science of lying with statistics. If you have heard something like “There as a 50% increase in murders in Small Town, year over year,” you know that something horrible is happening.
What if last year there were 2 murders and this year there are 3? That is a 50% increase. While every murder is bad, the difference between 2 and 3 murders a year is just as likely to be noise in the data.
But we can see where going from 2000 violent crimes to 3000 violent crimes in a year is bad.
Now look at a different version of this: “Over the last year there have only been 10 more murders year over year.” What they might be saying is that Small Town has gone from 2 murders per year to 12 murders per year. That might be alarming.
You have to know what to look at. Per capita? Raw numbers, percentages?
You also need to look at what the definitions are. It is impossible to compare the murder rate in the United States to the murder rate in the United Kingdom. We count different things as murder.
In the U.S., if a person is murdered, it counts as a murder. In the U.K., if a person is convicted of murdering somebody, then it is counted as murder. Until there is a conviction, the wrongful death is not classified as a murder.
There are many other ways to lie. There are two more that are worth touching on.
The first is a lie by omission. This is when a pertinent fact is left out of the fact pattern. “Today the police broke into a local man’s house, arresting him after he had an altercation with his neighbor [where he threatened to kill him while brandishing a firearm].”
The bracketed text changes the entire gist of the story. Both versions are true, but in one case it sounds like the police arrested that local man for something minor, breaking down his door to do so. When the more complete version is there, it sounds like the police are acting reasonably to protect the community.
The final method we’ll touch on is lying by telling the truth. If you can tell the absolute truth in such a way that nobody believes you, then you have succeeded in lying, if that was your intent.
Short Quote
By selectively quoting a person, you can change the meaning of what is said, or at the very least, the conotations.
Consider the following quote: “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.” Now consider the following quote:
I did
… sexual relations with that woman.
By omitting two words, “not have”, the entire meaning of the quote has changed. While we did not change any of his words, we have changed the meaning of his statement.
Or this made up newscast:
Again, the quote is correct, but the meaning is twisted.
When you read an article that has short quotes in it, it is best to assume that the meaning of the original statement is being manipulated. Find the original and listen to the statement in context.
Example
— Comm. on Educ. & the Workforce, 118th Cong., Antisemitism on College Campuses (2024)
The following is a partial transcription of the attached video.
This is 20 plus minutes into a press conference where reporters were shouting questions at Trump. You can see the words right there. He said it.
You can also see, from my highlight, that he also said very bad people. Even in this paragraph, he is clear that he is talking about the group of people protesting the renaming of the park and the removal of the Robert E. Lee statue.
Regardless of what you think of Lee’s name and statue, Lee is not and was never a Nazi or neo-Nazi and the people who were protesting had non-racist reasons. But let’s go a bit further in the video to this part:
And here is the part that most people never heard, never read.
A lie of omission.
End Part One
The Intermittent Missive – White House News
save this to repost on Halloween
https://www.facebook.com/reel/
(worth reading – jlr)
White House Welcomes Rosie O’Donnell’s Bid for Irish Citizenship as ‘Great News for America’
https://www.facebook.com/reel/
RCD VIA E-MAIL
Agony for Ellen Greenberg’s parents as Philadelphia rules her death by 20 stab wounds ‘WAS a suicide’ in staggering ruling
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/
Despite the extent and nature of her wounds, the Philadelphia Medical Examiner’s Office ruled her death a suicide.
Federal Judges Blame Trump and SCOTUS for a Problem They Created; We Need to Fix It Now
https://redstate.com/streiff/
The issue stems from the simple proposition that a nontrivial number of judges no longer see their job as ruling on conflicts of law. They see their job as ensuring the “correct,” and naturally progressive, outcome to cases. The very fact that Trump has had only one minor setback at the Supreme Court, despite having virtually every decision of consequence litigated, is an indication that the legal reasoning and arguments of his team are rock-solid; see SCOTUS Scorecard: How the Trump Administration Is Faring Before the High Court (So Far). With increasing frequency, courts are issuing rulings that amount to “I don’t like it.” So long as the President has legal authority to do so, that is not an argument that is a tantrum.
(Ruh Roh – jlr)
“We Want Our Entitlements”: In November, Food Stamp Money Will Run Out For 42 Million Very Angry Americans
https://michaeltsnyder.
…And we do not want to see millions of very hungry people take to the streets. (or is that the Democrat plan? – jlr)
‘Executive fiat’: Biden-era rule change quietly permits H-1B visa holders to work remotely
https://www.theblaze.com/news/
On December 18, 2024, the DHS filed the “H-1B Modernization Final Rule,” which took effect three days before Trump was sworn in to office. This lengthy document reveals a months-long deliberative process in which Biden officials relaxed H-1B enforcement standards to explicitly permit remote work — all under the pretext of “modernization.” (Hummmmm – just how remote is remote? Here in the USA, or remote as in India? – jlr)
DOJ alleges State Dept employee removed classified docs, met with Chinese officials
https://justthenews.com/
The employee, Ashley Tellis, is also a contractor with the Office of Net Assessment at the Department of Defense and is considered a subject matter expert on India and South Asian affairs, according to the DOJ,
Elderly woman beaten to death with a rock — police said they found her daughter ‘covered in blood’
https://www.theblaze.com/news/
(IF rocks kill people why are NONE of the usual gun control advocates wailing, screaming, and DEMANDING “Rock Control”? OH! Wait, it doesnt fit the template or the agenda of the left- jlr)
Snort…
https://oldnfo.substack.com/p/
Democrats are now demanding the removal of Dominion voting machines after a pro-Trump investor bought the company and rebranded them as Liberty Voting machines, with some Democrats even calling for paper ballots. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, it’s suddenly an issue??? Isn’t ‘that’ interesting…
DHS Confirms Sickening Plot ‘From Mexico’ Targeting ICE and CBP Agents
https://www.westernjournal.
DHS put out a blistering release that chronicled a sickening plot from south of the border that was targeting Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection agents — all the way in Chicago. headline: “Bounties Originating From Mexico Offered to Shoot ICE and CBP Officers in Chicago.”
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/
Is Pam Bondi Creating A Gun Owners Registry In America? Here’s What We Know
https://www.timesnownews.com/
Hamas Openly Violates Ceasefire, Vows Not to Disarm or Give Up Power, Conducts Mass Executions
https://gellerreport.com/2025/
“We will not be prisoners to Israeli terminology or demands. This will be a key focus in the next phase of our struggle.”
The trash taking itself out.
https://miguelgg.substack.com/
Fits are being had by the Media because of the new rules implemented in the Pentagon.
‘Goodbye’: Hegseth Shows Legacy Media Outlets The Door Amid Revolt Against New Pentagon Press Policy
https://www.zerohedge.com/
California: Priorities? What are those?
https://miguelgg.substack.com/
You can have Fire Departments focusing on “inclusivity” and pronouns rather than preventing and fighting fires with proper training and equipment. And rather than have a review and enhancement of emergency plans, we have now a legal mandate to make sure “fur babies” are rescued and returned to their owners… sorry… mommies.
The Federal Workforce Will Be a Little Smaller after the Government Shutdown Ends
https://reason.com/2025/10/15/
…the Trump administration has started using the government sort-of-shutdown as an opportunity to engage in mass layoffs of federal employees
Chuck Schumer Calls For “Forceful” Uprising Against Trump Administration
https://www.zerohedge.com/
Senator Chuck Schumer still can’t keep his big mouth shut when it comes to his repeated calls for activists to “rise up” and disrupt lawful White House policies. On MSNBC this week, Schumer discussed the government shutdown, as well as the indictments of Letitia James and John Bolton. Schumer once again called for a public uprising to stop Trump, which is likely in preparation for the “No Kings” protests scheduled for October 18th.
‘Actual medical professionals’ are telling Jasmine Crockett that Trump has had a stroke, she claims
https://www.bizpacreview.com/
From Behind Enemy Lines – Questions from the Left
On Saturday, while I was camped out at a lovely open air farmer and maker’s market for the afternoon, a Left friend reached out to people “on her feed” on Facebook. She said she was aware some of her followers and friends had voted for Trump, and asked if we were willing to explain why, and whether we feel Trump is doing an adequate job since getting into office. She made it crystal clear that no one was going to be dogpiled for responding (though I’m not sure how she intends to ensure that, since she can only control what’s on her wall, but the gesture was nice). She legitimately wanted to know.
I thought about it for a long time. I could have answered. I didn’t really want to do so in public, though. As I’ve said before, I’m still trying to keep my customers around, many of whom are on the Left. I don’t believe in mixing politics and business (other than what’s required by law… I mean that a business hanging a Trump or Dem sign out front is basically telling people that they value politics over business, and I might do so privately but not publicly). So I paged her privately and said I’d talk with her, but only in private.
She wanted to know why. I sat with that one for a good five minutes before finally explaining, “Because there’s been a lot of violence toward people on the Right of late, including a number of shootings. I don’t want to be shot, hun.” It took her a while to respond, and when she did, she admitted she understood now that it was explained, and that she was sorry if I felt threatened.
That led to me telling her I’d talk to her today or tomorrow (looks like tomorrow wins, as she’s busy today). I didn’t have time to get into long discussions with her while vending at a craft fair. She got it… she does the same thing (and well; she’s formed her own thriving business that is keeping her in her home, supporting her daughter, and paying for lawyers to keep her abusive ex out of her life). But I did explain to her that, while I didn’t think there was much chance of my being shot, it was something I thought about. A lot. Maybe Chris would get shot. Maybe one of my kids. I pointed out that an awful lot of Leftists and Liberals are talking freely right now, tromping around in front of ICE and the government, with no worry for their lives… and conservatives and Right leaning folk are wearing flak vests and standing behind bullet proof glass just to have simple conversations. After another long pause, she agreed. “Yeah…”
In the scattered long-distance chat we had over Saturday, she learned just how often I’d been called a Nazi of late, or a bigot, or a few other hateful names. She just couldn’t understand that. She’s known me since her girl was a little one, and left that little girl in my care on a few occasions during faire. She knows I support human beings living however they want, provided they’re consenting adults. She knows I’m poly, pagan, kinky, pansexual, all the things. She knows I’m not a Nazi, or a bigot. She knows, from personal experience, that I walk my talk.
What I intend to suggest to her is that, if we’d had the conversation in public, there might have come a moment when someone else used one of those horrid names for me. At that point, she would have had to either tell the person they were wrong (setting herself up as a target for her own people… ie largely how I ended up over here initially), be silent and let it happen (tacit approval), or engage in calling me names herself (open approval). Would she be willing to stand up for someone when it might put her at risk, or her kid? It’s a legitimate concern right now, after all. And that might lead to her asking herself why she’s involved with someone or a group of someones who would push her away because she had spoken with someone “like me.”
I think it’s going to be an interesting conversation…
The Intermittent Missive – Antifa, Democrats, and Islamic Takeovers, OH MY
Portland Antifa Operatives Planning Coordinated Action to Take Down Federal Aircraft
https://www.westernjournal.
Dominion Voting Bought Out, Renamed in Effort to Restore Trust to Vulnerable Electronic Voting Systems
https://www.westernjournal.
will that restore any faith the public lost after 2020? – does this really change anything?
Melania Trump’s ‘MELANIA’ Documentary from Amazon MGM Studios Set for January 30 Release
https://americanjournaldaily.
Florida Woman Disarms Hostage-Holding Suspect Thanks to Gun of Her Own
https://bearingarms.com/
Democrat Party Set TO PARTY at Luxury Spa After Voting to Shutdown the Govt. 8 TIMES
https://twitchy.com/samj/2025/
Islamic takeover of Texas? They don’t want you to see this
https://www.theblaze.com/
MEMO TO TRUMP: DON’T STOP – Is the NYT on my side?
https://anncoulter.substack.
How do you say Schadenfreude in Mexicano?
https://miguelgg.substack.com/
more here – https://bayourenaissanceman.
apparent original article – https://ace.mu.nu/archives/
OK, make up your mind. – Is it about all rights or only some of them?
https://miguelgg.substack.com/
Hell if anything, what they stand for is reason enough why you should have guns and a lot of loaded magazines.
I need to be callous here.
https://miguelgg.substack.com/
And that explains cats
https://miguelgg.substack.com/
embedded video – 00:00:09 – Even the Missus who is a Feline Fan found the video both funny and explanatory.
Neighbor Glows
https://areaocho.com/neighbor-
Top immigration official warns naturalization fraudsters could be stripped of citizenship
https://justthenews.com/
How Systems Collapse
https://gellerreport.com/2025/
“When merit is replaced with ideology, fires rage unchecked, killers walk free, and fragile systems collapse—leaving lives and cities in ruin.”
HAMAS DOCUMENT REVEALS WAR PLAN FOR 10/7: Meticulous Planning of Wholesale Slaughter, Mass Rape, Mutilation, Crush Heads, Burn Neighborhoods
https://gellerreport.com/2025/
Newly Empowered Hamas Conducting Mass Executions As it Re-Seizes Power in Gaza
https://gellerreport.com/2025/
Zohran Mamdani Took Thousands in Illegal Foreign Donations
https://gellerreport.com/2025/
How to Attend a ‘No Kings’ Rally Saturday
https://townhall.com/
(Don’t Do: stupid sh*t, with stupid people, in stupid places, at stupid times. – just saying – jlr)
RE-post of a past post
Bedlam, Pending
https://www.zerohedge.com/
Welcome to the TDS Zone
Unbelievable: Antony Blinken Gives Biden Credit for Gaza Deal, and It Gets Worse From There
https://redstate.com/bonchie/
The Weekly Feast – Brisket
I have a number of Jewish friends, and I hear about brisket all the time. There was the running joke about Howard’s mother’s brisket in The Big Bang Theory. Brisket is one of those cuts of meat that is just scrumptious, if cooked right. So how do you cook it? It depends a lot on the cut you’re using. I’m going for slow cooked brisket at this point in my cooking career, because I love the convenience of the slow cooker (though I did cook this one in the oven). It’s a bit pricey (our 3lb brisket cost about $21), but it’s totally worth it. Also, it makes your whole house smell like heaven.
Ingredients:
- 3 lbs untrimmed flat-cut beef brisket
- 1/2 tbsp salt, plus more to taste
- 1 tsp freshly ground black pepper, plus more to taste
- 3 tbsp oil (olive or vegetable)
- 2 medium yellow onions, sliced
- 4 celery stalks, cut into 2-inch pieces, leaves coarsely chopped
- 6 garlic cloves, smashed
- 2 cups red wine (such as Merlot or Pinot Noir)
- 28 oz canned crushed tomatoes
- 1/4 cup ketchup
- 2 tbsp brown sugar
- 1 tsp dried thyme OR several sprigs of fresh thyme
- 3 bay leaves
- 4 medium carrots, halved lengthwise and cut on a bias into 2-inch pieces
Preheat the oven to 325°F.
Season the brisket with most of the salt and pepper. Heat the oil in a large dutch oven over medium-high heat. Brown the brisket, turning occasionally, until browned on all sides, 10 to 12 minutes. Transfer to a plate.
Place the onions, celery, and garlic in the pot, tossing it in the residual fat. Season with the remaining salt and pepper. Cook, stirring occasionally, until the onions are soft and translucent, about 5 minutes.
Add the wine, tomatoes, ketchup, brown sugar, thyme, and bay leaves, and stir to combine. Nestle the brisket down into the liquid, fat side up. You may need to move some of the onion mix to get it low enough. Most of the brisket should be covered with liquid, but it’s okay if the fat is out. Cover the pot and cook in the oven until the meat is fork-tender, about 3 hours.
Uncover the pot and add the carrots around the brisket. Cook, uncovered, until the carrots are tender (not soft) and the top of brisket is browned and crisp, 35 to 45 minutes.
Remove the brisket from the pot and let it rest while you make the sauce. Use a spoon to skim fat from the surface of the braising liquid and discard. Heat over medium-high heat and cook until the liquid is thickened to a sauce-like consistency, 5 to 10 minutes. Remove the thyme sprigs and bay leaves. Taste and season with salt and pepper as needed. When the sauce is mostly ready, cut up the brisket by slicing it against the grain. Place the sliced brisket on a deep serving platter. Pour the sauce over the brisket and serve!
For sides, you need to keep in mind that Jewish folk don’t mix dairy and meat. If you don’t care, feel free to go with whatever sides you like, but if you want to enjoy the full Jewish brisket experience, try some baked sweet potato drizzled with olive oil, a cabbage and apple slaw for a tart finish, or some hot cornbread.
Wolford v. Lopez, the assumed schedule
Wolford is in an interlocutory state. They are appealing a preliminary injunction.
The purpose of the trial court is to gather evidence, hear legal arguments, and then decide based on evidence and the legal standing.
What the Supreme Court has said is that Second Amendment challenges do not need evidence. They are legal decisions, decided by the courts.
The law says “x”. The challenger says the plain text of the Second Amendment covers the conduct regulated by the law. The burden shifts to the state to show that the current law is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearms regulation.
There is no evidence to present. The court decides if the plain text covers the conduct. The court decides if the government has proven a history of firearms regulation that matches the current law. If the state fails to meet its burden, then the law is ruled unconstitional.
If the state wishes to bring in expert testimony regarding this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation, that expert must be a lawyer. Not only must they be a lawyer, they must be part of the case.
Friends of the court can express their opinion, but the only place those opinions have any weight is if they are legal arguments regarding regulations from the time of the founding or somehow relevant to finding that the conduct is not covered by the Second Amendment.
At this point, everybody in Wolford has agreed the plain text of the Second Amendment is implicated. The state can present their arguments to the Supreme Court just as easily as to the trial court. There is no value the trial court will add to the analysis the Supreme Court will do.
Which leads us to, when will we hear back from the Supreme Court?
Cert was granted on October 3, 2025. Per rule 25 of the Supreme Court, the Petitioner (Plaintiff) must have their briefing in within 45 days. November 17, 2025. It is unlikely that this date will be pushed. Amici briefs supporting the Petitioner are due 7 days after.
The Respondent’s (defendant’s) brief is due 30 days after that, on December 17th. Again, Amici briefs the Respondent or neither are due 7 days after.
The Petitioner gets to reply to the Respondent’s brief. That is due 30 days after the respondent dockets their brief, putting us at January 10, 2026.
If everything goes as scheduled, oral arguments will be heard in February, with the opinion issuing in May.
I expect we will see at least one other Second Amendment case this term. If the Court is looking at Wolford to address sensitive places, then there will be no other sensitive places challenges heard.
That leaves a case dealing on what “arms” means. When that case is heard, they will address the proper usage of the “in common use for lawful purposes” shortcut to a Second Amendment win.
Win the War, Not Just a Battle
Winning the Battle
There are too many historical situations where a combatant won a battle, but it cost them the war. Little Big Horn comes to mind, though I don’t know enough to say if it is a true or good example.
The cost of winning might come with excessive loss of resources. A Pyrrhic victory.
The anti-gun people understand this. They are sometimes willing to lose a battle to maintain battlefield dominance. In N.Y.S.R. & P.A. v. New York City the city and state fought tooth and nail. They didn’t stop fighting. We lost in the district court. We lost in the Circuit Court. We appealed to the Supreme Court, and we were granted cert.
The anti-gunners looked at this and proceeded to remove the challenged regulations for New York City gun owners. The state of New York passed a law saying that New York City could never do it again. The state then told the Supreme Court the case was moot. The case was never heard. It died.
We “won” the battle; the anti-gunners won that war.
Rahimi
The anti-gun Biden administration saw a slate of cases moving towards the Supreme Court challenging §922(g)(8), Domestic Violence Restraining Order in Possession. The best case for us was the Range case. The worst for us was the Rahimi case.
Range was a case about a man who failed to claim income from his lawn care side hustle while he was receiving aid from the state. He was charged with defrauding the government. This was a felony. He pleaded guilty. He served no time. He was told to go forth and sin no more. And he kept his nose clean.
As a convicted felon, he is prohibited from possessing firearms. He went to court to get his rights back. His case would have been a wonderful opportunity to show that non-violent felons, under the 1968 GCA, cannot be prohibited from possessing firearms.
Rahimi, on the other hand, was a violent criminal. Witnesses saw him slam his girlfriend’s head into the car. He fired his gun at witnesses. He was arrested and was in prison for multiple felonies as well as being subject to a DVR while in possession.
After Bruen was decided, the Fifth Circuit court pulled the Rahimi case back after issuing their opinion. In their second opinion, they applied Bruen faithfully and declared §922(g)(8) unconstitutional.
Merrick Garland pushed Rahimi to the front of the line, and it was heard by the Supreme Court, which issued their opinion. Rahimi is a bad man. He needs to be in prison. He is precisely the sort of person that should not have access to arms.
This means that there are bad facts. Bad facts make for bad law. In this case we ended up with an opinion that was more easily twisted by inferior courts.
Garland v. Bondi
When Rahimi was requesting cert, the Garland-controlled DOJ pushed the Supreme Court to take the case. When the DOJ asks the Court to take a case, they are more likely to take the case requested by the DOJ than other similar cases. We did not want this to happen. Yes, we wanted the Court to hear a 2A case. This was not the one we wanted in front of the Supreme Court.
We are now looking at Rush v. USA. This is another case with bad facts. Mr. Rush is not a good man. He was doing bad things, and FO was applied to him.
He had his license revoked. He drove to his court hearing. He drove away after the court hearing. The cops stopped him to ask what he was doing driving on a revoked license. During the stop they smelled and observed pot. He was arrested. While searching his car, they found an SBR.
We don’t need to go into what he had done to be in court in the first place; needless to say, not a good fact pattern.
We do not want Rush in front of the Supreme Court. In the best of worlds, we are only going to get a lackluster result. In addition, there are other vehicles in the works attacking SBR, Silencers, and SBS remaining inside the NFA.
Damning With Faint Praise
My father explained this to me in terms of how a superior officer might praise a lower ranking member with faint praise. He said nothing that can be challenged, but everybody reading the report will know what is not said.
A pitcher might be praised for how far he can spit his tobacco juice. This likely implies he’s not a good pitcher.
The DOJ must make a good faith effort to explain why cert should be denied. It has to be grounded in legal reasoning. And they do that.
Their motion is darn weak. They rely on regulations from the 19th century. The whitewash Miller‘s findings. In short, it half hearted. But they use it as a method to say:
— Rush v. USA, DOJ Response, SCOTUS 24-1259
This is on point. It is a statement that the DOJ wants the Supreme Court to hear a 2A case, just not this one.
Final Note
As we have discussed, a circuit split is useful for getting the Supreme Court to grant cert. Getting a circuit split on anti-gun laws is very difficult because anti-gun states passing infringements exist within anti-gun inferior courts. The Ninth Circuit is many to zero in favor of California infringements.
The Seventh is nearly as bad. So are the Second, Fourth, Third, and First circuits. Well, sort of.
The Third Circuit, as of Friday, was 7-6 Republican appointees. In an upcoming en banc hearing, they will be 8-6. The problem is that if one of those Republican appointed judges flips to the side of infringement, we will lose in the Third Circuit, again.
On Friday, the Senate confirmed Professor Jennifer Lee Mascott to the Third Circuit. If President Trump signs the confirmation, and she is sworn in by a Supreme Court Justice by the morning of the 15th, she will sit and hear Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs v. Platkin (consolidated with Firearms Policy Coalition v. Platkin, Docket Nos. 24-2002 and 24-2003).
With Judge Mascott on the Third Circuit for this hearing, there will be a 10-6 balance. Even if we were to lose one judge to the dark side, we still win the case.
If we win in the Third Circuit, we will have the circuit split on “Assault Weapons” bans.
Conclusion
All is not as it seems on the surface. You have to look beyond what we are seeing and look to the future. Pam Bondi and Trump are good for the Second Amendment. If it looks like they are not, wait a minute. Take a deep breath and figure out what else is going on.
Reese v. Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms & Explosives, Update
Yeah, it really was the judge being a clown. The state did not ask for membership lists.
On Friday the parties, the state, and the plaintiffs filed a joint motion to amend the final judgement.
- The Court’s Judgment compels Plaintiffs to disclose their membership as of November 6, 2020, to the Government by October 28, 2025.
- The Government, as a general policy, does not compel disclosure of the identity of members of private organizations, and the Government did not seek to do so here.
- Plaintiffs assert that the Judgment’s order compelling them to disclose their membership violates the First Amendment and would subject them to irreparable harm. See, e.g. Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta, 594 U.S. 595, 606 (2021).
- To be clear, Plaintiffs do not concede that altering the Judgment in this way would make its scope appropriate, and Plaintiffs retain their right to challenge all aspects of the Judgment on appeal. However, in the absence of the proposed amendment, Plaintiffs face an imminent deadline compelling the disclosure of their membership information.
- To avoid the need for Plaintiffs to file an emergency motion to stay the disclosure deadline, the Parties respectfully request that the Court act on this motion by October 14, 2025.
Short translation, the state is still attempting to make a facial challenge judgement into an as-applied judgement, but even the government understands that demanding membership lists is verboten.