‘Make Sotomayor cry again!’ Liberal SCOTUS judge throws tantrum over over bump stock ruling

In the first of several rulings on major cases that could roll back the left’s overreach, the Supreme Court struck down a federal ban on bump stocks, a major blow to the anti-Second Amendment agenda.

The ruling, which came down on Friday morning, rejected a Trump-era ban on the firearm accessory that leftists claim converts ordinary semiautomatic rifles into “machine guns,” a designation that would include the devices in the banned federal category for such weapons.

But the conservative majority disagreed with the ban and ruled that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) “exceeded its statutory authority.”

Democrats reacted with their standard foaming-at-the-mouth fury, including from the bench of the SCOTUS where Obama-appointed activist Sonia Sotomayor had a cow over the 6-3 ruling that broke down along ideological lines, with the three left-wing women in opposition.

“We conclude that [a] semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock is not a ‘machinegun’ because it does not fire more than one shot ‘by a single function of the trigger,’” wrote Justice Clarence Thomas for the majority.

In a scathing dissent, the “wise Latina” opened fire on her colleagues in the majority, going so far as to read her angry diatribe from the bench in a bit of the unseemly grandstanding usually seen from Democrats in the House of Representatives.

“Today, the Court puts bump stocks back in civilian hands,” Sotomayor wrote in the leftist trio’s dissent. “To do so, it casts aside Congress’s definition of ‘machinegun’ and seizes upon one that is inconsistent with the ordinary meaning of the statutory text and unsupported by context or purpose.”

“When I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck,” the Obama appointee continued.

“This is not a hard case. All of the textual evidence points to the same interpretation,” she added.

“Its interpretation requires six diagrams and an animation to decipher the meaning of the statutory text,” Sotomayor wrote, claiming that the decision “enables gun users and manufacturers to circumvent federal law.”

Some might be tempted to point out that what really walks, swims and quacks like “a duck” is a flaming far-left activist in robes, one whose office may have leaked the explosive draft signaling the overturning of Roe v. Wade last year.

The overly emotional justice’s outburst comes weeks after her confession that she ran to her office and wept after certain rulings that she disagreed with.

“There are days that I’ve come to my office after an announcement of a case and closed my door and cried,” she said while being honored at Harvard University. “There have been those days. And there likely will be more.”

Friday was one of those days.

Chris Donaldson


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Latest Articles