0
0
Ace of Spades Morning Report
Good morning, kids. In case you missed it, there was an horrific mass stabbing at a Chinese kindergarten the other day that left six dead, three of whom were children.
Obviously, with everything else going on both here and abroad something like this, as terrible as it is, becomes only so much background noise before disappearing altogether as the news cycles spin and move on to something else. It’s worth noting, not only as a juxtaposition to the gun control stories over here but also because this is not a one-off crime. There have been a spate of mass stabbings at Chi-Com schools and a few other places going back at least 15 years if not longer. It’s a story that if it can’t be embargoed altogether by Chi-Com propagandists and their western “comrades” gets excused as a one-off mental health issue, or swept under the rug if at all possible – which is the exact opposite of what happens here when it involves a gun, a white heterosexual male, and a non-leftist. Preferably all of the above, but I digress.
American Conservative
Two common-sense rulings from the Supreme Court uphold core principles of American democracy and law.
If there were two lessons from the high school civics class most Americans seemed to have skipped that should be learned now, they are: Rights are for everyone and free speech sometimes protects speech you don’t like yourself. Luckily, the Supreme Court recently offered America tutorials on both topics.
In Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina the Court made the common-sense ruling that discrimination against some races is a poor way to fix discrimination against other races. What woke mind could have possibly conceived that the 14th Amendment’s establishment of equal protection under the law meant treating a large portion of the population unfairly at the expense of another?
American Thinker
Incorporating Out-of-State Regulations is Unconstitutional
Can one state implement a law enacted by another?
Can it enforce regulations set by bureaucrats in another?
If it does, isn’t the state ignoring the will of its people? And isn’t that unconstitutional? The commonsense answers are evident. But the practice of outsourcing is widespread in emissions regulation.
Besides Washington D.C., as many as 14 states – the CARB states, so called after the California Air Resources Board – apply the bluebook, California’s stringent air pollution control laws. In most of them, lawmakers have neither legislated on the matter nor consulted citizens.
Bearing Arms
Remember The Journal News’ online interactive map of gun owners? Everytown just pulled a similar stunt.
Journalism is supposed to inform, not inflame, the public. But that old standard has been functionally dead for a long, long time. And that’s especially true when it comes to reporting on guns and the Second Amendment.
It’s been more than a decade, but I still remember like it was yesterday: in the aftermath of Sandy Hook, a newspaper decided to take it upon itself to exact revenge on average lawful gun owners in New York, specifically in Westchester and Rockland counties, based on the theory that lawful New Yorkers with government-granted pistol permits were somehow responsible for what happened in Newtown, Connecticut.
The newspaper in question was The Journal News. They published an online, interactive map containing the names and home addresses of all pistol permit holders licensed in Westchester and Rockland counties. They were totally reckless in doing so and showed complete disregard for the privacy and safety of those citizens. The paper’s publisher openly admitted that she did so because of what happened in Newtown:
Daniel Greenfield
LEFTISTS ARGUE GOVERNMENT CENSORSHIP IS THE HIGHEST FORM OF SPEECH
When Judge Terry Doughty issued an injunction in Missouri v. Biden that banned the government from “specifically flagging content or posts on social-media platforms and/or forwarding such to social-media companies urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner for removal, deletion, suppression”, all hell broke loose.
Evelyn Douek, a Stanford law professor, formerly of the Knight First Amendment Institute, warned that preventing the government from colluding with corporations to censor citizens would have a “chilling effect on communication between the government and platforms.”
