Barack Obama is once again circumventing the legislative process in order to push his administration’s unpopular leftist agenda. First, it was illegal immigration, then transgender bathrooms. This time, it’s guns.
Earlier this year, the White House announced new policies for those receiving social security benefits in conjunction with the president’s January 5th executive order on gun ownership. When it was released, few seemed to notice that the order allowed the administration to withhold Second Amendment rights from those who collect social security.
The move makes little logical sense. Social Security beneficiaries have never proven themselves as particularly violent or incapable of gun ownership. Instead, it seems as if this is part of Obama’s larger plan to slowly and surreptitiously restrict gun ownership whenever and wherever possible.
The administration was likely hoping that this slow creep of new regulations would go unnoticed until it was too late to be repealed. Fortunately, the watchful eyes of conservative media caught them in the act.
See Obama’s secret gun ban on the next page:
Wait! Where is his reason given for this action? I need to know more about this. I mean he is allready the worst. But surely he gave an excuse for doing this.
So true. I pay social security and am 53 years old. I doubt the money is there when I want it. Our government is out of control.
Mike Hayden it’s true. If you get sick you are still screwed. They need to do away with forcing people to buy insurance along with the fine. They should keep the preexisting conditions though. That’s where they should start!
Repeal SS & MC
That’s right, now Chicago murders will stop. What a stupid$#%&!@*
Screw him!
Unconstitutional therefore unenforceable marbury vs Madison
Last time I checked Biden is a demo. He was the one who originally stated a scouts nominee should be picked by the next president when an opening occurs in an election year. Karma is a b… Isn’t it?
The Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution (Article VI, Clause 2) establishes that the Constitution, federal laws made pursuant to it, and treaties made under its authority, constitute the supreme law of the land.[1] It provides that state courts are bound by the supreme law; in case of conflict between federal and state law, the federal law must be applied. Even state constitutions are subordinate to federal law.[2] In essence, it is a conflict-of-laws rule specifying that certain national acts take priority over any state acts that conflict with national law. In this respect, the Supremacy Clause follows the lead of Article XIII of the Articles of Confederation, which provided that “Every State shall abide by the determination of the United States in Congress Assembled, on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them.”[3] A constitutional provision announcing the supremacy of federal law, the Supremacy Clause assumes the underlying priority of federal authority, at least when that authority is expressed in the Constitution itself.[4] No matter what the federal government or the states might wish to do, they have to stay within the boundaries of the Constitution. This makes the Supremacy Clause the cornerstone of the whole American political structure.[5][6]
Text
Worse. He has to have TWO safety pins. Must be real inconsolable. Most the crybaby libtards need only one.