Rogue Washington Supreme Court Commissioner Displays Total Ignorance of the 2nd Amendment ~ VIDEO

In the ever-evolving discourse around the Second Amendment, recent events in Washington state have catapulted the debate into the national spotlight.

The focal point of this ongoing battle is the recent ruling by Judge Gary Basher of Cowlitz County, which deemed the state’s ban on magazines holding more than ten rounds unconstitutional. This decision underscores a pivotal moment in our understanding and application of constitutional rights, specifically the right to keep and bear arms.

A Judge’s Stand on Constitutional Grounds

Judge Basher’s decision, issued on April 8th, 2024, didn’t just stir the pot; it boiled it over. In a meticulously crafted 55-page ruling, he addressed the ban imposed by Washington state, highlighting its contradiction with both the state and federal constitutions. The judge’s argument was clear: the restrictions infringe on the fundamental individual right to bear arms—a cornerstone of American liberty.

The Immediate Backlash and a Supreme Court’s Pause

However, the victory was short-lived. Within a mere 88 minutes post-decision, a Supreme Court commissioner, a role akin to a high-level law clerk, issued a stay. As the seattletimes.com reported:

“Attorney General Bob Ferguson filed an emergency appeal to the state Supreme Court, seeking to get the law back on the books. Michael Johnston, the Washington state Supreme Court commissioner, granted an emergency stay Monday evening, keeping the ban in effect, for now.”

This action temporarily halted the enforcement of Judge Basher’s ruling, sparking a flurry of debate and confusion about the powers and limits of legal authorities in such significant matters.

The Hearing: A Display of Judicial Theater?

On April 17th, 2024, Commissioner Michael Johnson conducted a hearing to deliberate whether to uphold his stay. The proceedings, lasting 57 minutes, didn’t just highlight the legal arguments but also unveiled the commissioner’s overtly active role in the discussion, which arguably overshadowed the essence of judicial impartiality and listening. This hearing, streamed online here, seemed less about judicial review and more a performance of judicial theater—where the outcome felt predetermined and the process, a mere formality.

Ignorance of the Role of Firearms and Magazines

Critics argue that the commissioner’s approach to defining what constitutes an “arm” under the Second Amendment is narrow and historically unfounded. The argument that a magazine isn’t an arm because a firearm can operate with fewer rounds is a dangerous oversimplification that ignores the integral role of magazines in the functionality of modern firearms. Such interpretations threaten to undermine not just the letter of the law but its spirit, as envisioned by the framers of the Constitution.

As the community awaits the commissioner’s final decision, it’s crucial to engage in informed and respectful dialogue about the implications of this case. The ongoing legal processes not only test the resilience of our judicial system but also challenge us to reflect on the balance between safety and liberty.

This isn’t just about a magazine capacity ban; it’s about affirming the sanctity of our constitutional rights against erosions masked as regulatory measures. As proponents of the Second Amendment, we must remain vigilant, informed, and ready to advocate for rights that, once eroded, may be irretrievable.

The case in Washington is a microcosm of a larger national debate on gun rights. It exemplifies the challenges faced by constitutional rights in contemporary legal and political climates. As this case progresses, it may well set a precedent that will influence not only future interpretations of the Second Amendment but also the broader dialogue around civil liberties in America.

Let’s ensure our voices are heard, our rights defended, and our freedoms preserved.

Big thanks to video host Mark Smith at Four Boxes Diner, where these issues are explored in depth. For those seeking to understand the nuances of this legal battle and its implications for Second Amendment rights, the video provides a compelling visual and auditory insight into the complexities of this crucial issue.