By: Anthony Morelli

This news out of the Supreme Court won’t make gun owners happy.

The Supreme Court isn’t standing up for gun freedoms.

And one attack on the Second Amendment will continue after the Supreme Court refused to stop it.

Out of the nine judges on the Supreme Court, there are a wide variety of ideologies and approaches to the job.

There are the very conservative judges like Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch, who are willing to go down swinging for causes they believe in.

There are the very liberal judges, like Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, who are very similar, but on the opposite side.

Amy Coney Barrett is in her own category, as she is quite conservative but with more of a focus on social issues like abortion, and less so on government issues.

Then there are the moderates, John Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh, who hold the keys to the entire Court.

And when the Supreme Court fails to stop an attack on the Second Amendment, as they did with a California law recently, the spotlight on them increases.

According to The Truth About Guns, “The U.S. Supreme Court on April 28 declined to hear a challenge to the restrictive California law prohibiting gun shows on publicly owned property.

“In 2022, the California legislature passed a law forbidding all gun shows on public property. In response, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), California Rifle & Pistol Association (CRPA) and others, including gun show promoter B&L Productions Inc., filed a lawsuit challenging the ban.”

This ban is quite unnecessary, but it is yet another example of the state of California having a bone to pick with gun owners and the gun industry and passing laws to restrict them.

The Supreme Court could have done something about this, but once again they chose not to in a major surrender.

The article continues, “After a district court ruled the law to be constitutional, on appeal, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s ruling. The court held that the challenged statutes do not infringe on B&L’s constitutional rights.

“The court found that the statutes solely restrict non-expressive conduct—contracting for the sale of firearms—and are not subject to First Amendment scrutiny. Additionally, the court ruled that the plain text of the Second Amendment does not cover B&L’s proposed conduct.”

One has to wonder exactly what the breakdown of opinions on the Supreme Court was about whether to take up this issue or whether to let it slide.

The internal deliberations are not known, but clearly there were not enough votes on the Court to take it up, and now the state of California will get off scot-free.

This is a very unfortunate series of events for gun owners, who were hoping that a Supreme Court which is widely considered to be “conservative” would do more in this case.

But that is not how things turned out, and the attack on the Second Amendment coming out of California will continue.