Sophie and I started the day off on the wrong dog foot. I forgot yesterday that I was out of canned dog food, didn’t remember until midnight which was too late to ask Jordan for a can. So first thing this morning, I fed Sophie dry kibble. No kidding! She gave me a long look, like, “This is it? I ordered eggs Benedict and you’re giving me porridge?” By time for her second breakfast (don’t ask!), I had gotten a can of meat, which she thought was much better.
And another mix-up. Jean was
coming for supper, and I had the parts all ready and in the fridge. So I was a
bit surprised when Subie and Phil appeared at five o’clock—I had them on my
calendar for tomorrow night. Luckily, part of supper for Jean was a cucumber
dip, so we all enjoyed that and a visit, Subie and Phil left, and Jean and I
had supper and a visit. Supper was smoked salmon, potato salad, and cucumber
dip. Needs work. But the conversation was good. Nice that I’m flexible, but now
I have no company Saturday or Sunday. Guess I’ll order myself some fresh Dover
sole for Saturday.
The real thing I wanted to blog about tonight, instead of my forgetful memory and disorganized friends, is a group of volunteer moms I read about this week. In 2022’s Bruen decision, the Supreme Court struck down bans on concealed carry and expanded upon the previous standard for determining the constitutionality of gun regulations, declaring that authorities had to find analogous gun laws that existed prior to 1900. Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the court, found that before that date, concealed carry bans were not part of America’s history and traditions, and they were thus unconstitutional.
About 20 volunteers with Moms Demand Action, part of the gun safety group
Everytown, are scouring archives across the United States for historical
firearm regulations. The project is far from academic. In Bruen, the Supreme
Court demanded proof that a firearm regulation is rooted in “longstanding”
tradition in the form of “historical analogues”—old gun laws that show how
Americans “understood” the Second Amendment in the past. The historical record
of firearm regulations, however, is far from complete. So motivated volunteers are
stepping in to fill the gaps. What they’ve found directly contradicts the
Supreme Court’s conclusions.
While the academic research already relied upon by Thomas and other judges to
strike down gun laws has been shaky at best, the stakes of attempting to
satisfy the test he laid out could not be higher. For just one example, see
next term’s big gun case, which asks whether the Second Amendment prevents the
government from disarming people who are under a restraining order for domestic
violence.
These women volunteers are going
beyond giving voice to their cause, and I admire that. Let’s hope they come up
with strong gun control laws to convince our extremist judges. What I don’t understand
is judicial precedent for saying a law had to exist before 1900. Did Justice
Thomas make that up out of his own imagination?
That these women are working so hard
is, however, part of a new trend to me, and we are seeing it in Texas. It’s a
trend to fight Republican authoritarianism and tricks. In Texas, judges have
recently ruled that the ban on gender-affirming care for teenagers is
unconstitutional, and so is the book banning law which requires vendors to
label sexual content in books and ultimately categorize a backlog of books
sold, a task that would consume untold work hours and expense. The AG’s office
has appealed the gender care bill, which somehow means the bill will go into
effect until the Texas Supreme Court rules—and I believe they have greenlighted
the bill. But the book law is held in abeyance pending the outcome of the
appeal. In Houston, teachers are speaking out against the state (read Republican)
takeover of the education system with ridiculous requirements. What these cases
say to me is that people are fighting back rather than abjectly accepting these
ridiculous rulings from on high. (Eat your heart out, Greg Abbott)
When I see one of the frequent comparisons
of what is happening to our country to what happened in 1930s Germany, I
immediately think of Martin Niemöller’s poem about not speaking out. The big
difference to me is that Americans are speaking out. It doesn’t always work,
but resistance is showing some slow progress. I don’t have statistics at hand,
but the number of Americans who support abortion care, gender-affirming care, freedom
to read, freedom in the classroom, and—a biggie—gun control is astounding, mostly
in the 80% range. We will not lose our freedoms if we continue to speak out,
especially at the ballot box.
Feminist Gloria Steinem proclaims that
if one person speaks out, they make it easier for the next person to speak out.
And that very hopeful sign is what I see in America. We will not give up
democracy easily, and no, we don’t need violence in the streets.
Watch for a Mothers Against Greg
Abbott sign to go up in our front yard this weekend.
Have you found your voice yet to speak
out for whatever you consider right and proper?
No comments:
Post a Comment