The second amendment is not subject to judicial repeal: response to the Supreme Court's betrayal

Today, the US Supreme Court has once again demonstrated that black robes are not a defense against yellow thorns. In a surprising 7-2 decision, the court supported the Biden administration's authoritarian attempt to regulate so-called ghost guns, surrendering Washington's constant Leviathan a more important inch of the constitution.

Judge Neil Gorsuch, who mistakenly believed many were friends with the Constitution, wrote the opinion as not taking seriously the objections to the ATF's withdrawal committee. Gorsuch wrote that the court “is no problem with rejecting” the arguments made by the plaintiffs. An argument rooted in a historical understanding of the right to maintain and endure the obvious texts and weapons of the Constitution.

If the founder had been a tyrannical and very Cavalier, there would not be Lexington Green or Concord Bridge.

Power play

Don't make mistakes: This ruling is not about “kits” or “weapons that cannot be tracked.” This is about the power of the raw federal government. The bureaucratic body, the ATF, is an ATF without legislative authorities, invents regulations that infringe the right of the Constitution to declare that “must not be violated.” And now the seizing is sanctified by the very branch of the government, which is intended to be the final guardian of the Constitution.

Let's be clear: the second amendment is not subject to the abolition of justice.

It does not get reinterpretation by unelected judges, nor does it follow the horrors of the fantasies of the three-letter institutional bureaucrats and tyrants. It's a natural right. It is an existing government, pre-constitutional law, and is not recognized by any men. That right was recognized and protected by the founders because they understood the disarmed citizens as the most reliable sign of tyrannical rule.

As George Mason pointed out in the Virginia Ratification Convention, “Disarming people is the best and most effective way to enslav them.”

And, as Thomas Jefferson warned, “The free man must not underestimate the use of weapons.”

But today, the Supreme Court decided in 2025 that freedom could be governed by the Fiat, rights could be regulated by regulations, and that so-called ghost guns are somehow more dangerous than the ghosts of tyranny currently haunting the chambers of government.

Redefinition of firearms

The ATF rules redefine the weapon part as the firearm itself. Such logic could soon be declared a firearm if it could be machined into a lower receiver at some point. And now, seven judges have given their blessings to this brave bureaucratic magical act.

This isn't just an attack on the second fix. It is an attack on the very concept of limited government.

We left the constitution when unelected bureaucrats could redefine the language in the law and expand their power, and when the court shrugged and said, “There's nothing wrong with this.” We have entered the realm of regulatory tyranny. There, rights were granted on the whims of the ruling class and retracted just as easily.

Our founders fought to protect their regulated rights and did not die. They knew that the government that controls the weapons of the people controls them and controls the people themselves. That is why the Second Amendment was written in the order. “Do not be violated.”

The question isn't whether your ghost gun kit requires tools or expertise. The question is whether the federal government has constitutional authority to limit the rights of its own, or of its citizens to carry weapons. The answer is definitely not, as the founder revealed with Flintlock in his hand.

Patrick Henry said, “The great purpose is that everyone is armed. The courts today spit on their legacy.

Stand up against the judiciary overreach

Let's make this a Clarion call to these united (but declined) state patriots. We cannot rely on the court to protect our rights. It is time for the state to reassert their sovereignty, negate the unconstitutional federal overreach, and intervene on behalf of those whose freedom is under constant assault.

To those who still cling to the illusion that the courts are guardians of our freedom, I say: The Constitution is not self-enforcement. It lives only in the minds of those willing to protect it, by education, by law, and by invalidation if necessary.

The Federation Beast does not stop itself. We have to stop it.