RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-won-your-gun-case-youre-fired-11656024233?mod=opinion_lead_pos3

“Kirkland’s invertebrate abdication illustrates how progressive ideology dominates the commanding heights of American law, business and culture. If you want to know why a groundswell of opposition against this woke conformity is building in the provinces, this is it.”

A 6-3 victory at the Supreme Court vindicating a constitutional right is usually cause for congratulations, but not these days at Kirkland & Ellis, the giant white-shoe law firm. The firm has rewarded partner Paul Clement for his triumph Thursday in the big New York gun-rights case (see nearby) by telling him to drop his gun clients or leave the firm.

As Mr. Clement and his litigation partner, Erin Murphy, explain nearby, they’re leaving the firm rather than dump their clients. That’s the honorable and ethical decision.

But it’s worth noting how extraordinary it is for a law firm to fire its victorious clients whose rights have been upheld by no fewer than six Justices. It’s as if the law firm representing Clarence Gideon had told him to get lost after the Supreme Court upheld his right to legal counsel in his famous 1963 case, Gideon v. Wainwright.

“Kirkland & Ellis announced today its decision to no longer represent clients with respect to matters involving the interpretation of the Second Amendment,” the firm said in a press release, without explanation. It added that Mr. Clement and Ms. Murphy “will be leaving the firm in order to continue their full range of existing representations.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/vindicating-the-second-amendment-11656024307?mod=opinion_lead_pos1

The Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling Thursday on gun rights boils down to this: The Second Amendment doesn’t disappear when you walk out your front door. Stated that way, it sounds obvious, but many appeals judges have disagreed. For a frustrating decade, the Supreme Court was too gun-shy to set them straight, but Justice Clarence Thomas’s majority opinion was worth the wait.***

New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen challenged the Empire State’s regulations on carrying a firearm in public. Open carry in New York is banned. With certain exceptions, such as for judges, getting a permit to carry a handgun that’s concealed requires demonstrating “proper cause.” That has been interpreted to mean “a special need” for self-defense, beyond that of “the general community or of persons engaged in the same profession.”

In other words, shopkeepers who must carry cash through high-crime neighborhoods are out of luck. But as Justice Thomas points out, the Constitution protects a right not only to “keep” but also to “bear” arms. “Most gun owners do not wear a holstered pistol at their hip in their bedroom or while sitting at the dinner table,” he writes. “To confine the right to ‘bear’ arms to the home would nullify half of the Second Amendment’s operative protections.”

This does not mean urban America will soon resemble the Wild West. Forty-three states, Justice Thomas says, already have “shall issue” regimes, meaning carry permits are available to everyone who meets objective criteria. That process can be rigorous and might include fingerprinting, firearms training, background checks, and so forth. A concurring opinion by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, stresses that the Court is not calling such rules into question.

https://openthebooks.substack.com/p/just-how-much-federal-pork-and-waste

The ever-rising national debt just surpassed $30 trillion this year – at least $91,613 for every person in the U.S. So, just how much federal waste, silliness, weird or unnecessary spending are your tax dollars funding?

Delving into the trillions of dollars in annual spending, our auditors at OpenTheBooks.com, recently examined Washington’s discretionary spending—beyond such big-ticket items as health, welfare and defense.

We found staggering examples and highlighted some of the worst in our new oversight report, Where’s The Pork?

Dead people paid billions: 2.2 million deceased people received $3.6 billion in economic stimulus checks. The government asked for it back, but dead people are notoriously bad about paying up. The federal government is equally bad about clawing it back.

How did this happen? Well, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) didn’t check the Social Security Administration’s “deceased persons” list. Why have a deceased persons list if you don’t check the list before cutting the check?

The Do Not Pay list–Got Paid: The Small Business Administration (SBA) doled out 57,000 Paycheck Protection Plan (PPP) forgivable loans to entities on the Do Not Pay list housed at Treasury. Again, why have a do not pay list if you are not going to check it. Cost to taxpayers? $3.6 billion.

https://amgreatness.com/2022/06/22/why-the-left-will-cut-biden-loose/

Republican pundits and conservative activists are debating whether they can win in 2024 with the successful Trump agenda, but without the controversial Donald Trump as their nominee.  

The Democrats have a similar, but far more serious dilemma with Joe Biden as the Democratic Party’s nominee in 2024.  

Unlike the Trump Administration’s successful four years, Biden’s tenure has been an utter disaster. There are no policy offsets to the personal liabilities and unpopularity of Biden himself. 

Biden’s liabilities transcend his physical infirmities, his advanced age, and his seeming geometric rather than arithmetic rate of mental decline. 

Biden, moreover, proves daily that he is not a nice guy. His excesses, past and present, are precisely those the Left considers mortal sins. 

Walking back Biden’s absurdities has become the nonstop, tiresome task of many on the Left. As they face a midterm disaster in November, many no longer see any compensating reasons not to drop Biden.  

When the Republicans take the House of Representatives in 2022 there will be nonstop investigations of Hunter Biden’s alleged tax avoidances, his possibly illegal work as an unregistered foreign agent, and Joe Biden’s untaxed compensation he received from the Biden lobbying consortium. 

Consider also Biden’s nastiness.

During the 2020 campaign he personally attacked a young co-ed as a “lying dog-faced pony soldier” and a stocky questioner was reduced to “fat.” 

Unlike Trump’s art of the deal, exaggerations, and distortions, Biden says things that are not simply untrue, but abjectly preposterous—such as the United States currently has a lower inflation rate than major European industrial powers. 

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/06/science-finally-triumphs-over-trans-ideology-joseph-klein/

The international governing body for swimming competitions, FINA, struck a blow for rationality and fairness in its newly announced “Policy On Eligibility For The Men’s And Women’s Competition Categories.” FINA decided to bar transgender women from participating in women’s elite international swimming competitions unless they had undergone medical treatments to suppress production of testosterone and completed their “transition” prior to the age of 12. The new policy, which was announced on June 19th, is based on biological science.

Before reaching its decision, FINA had established a Science Group “to examine the most up-to-date scientific knowledge on (1) the impact of biological sex on athletic performance, and (2) the impact of gender-affirming medical transition on factors that influence athletic performance, and to produce a report setting out their findings.”

The Science Group’s report concluded that “biological sex is a key determinant of athletic performance, with males outperforming females in sports (including Aquatics sports) that are primarily determined by neuromuscular, cardiovascular, and respiratory function, and anthropometrics including body and limb size. The extent of the male/female performance gap varies by sport and competition, but the gap universally emerges starting from the onset of puberty.”

FINA coupled the results of its scientific investigation into the impact of the physical differences between biologically born males and biologically born females after reaching puberty with its commitment to fundamental fairness in promoting male and female athletes and male and female sport equally. Blurring the physiological distinctions between the sexes that affect athletic performance by allowing the fluidity of gender identity to govern who can compete as a female in women’s aquatic sports violates both scientific and fair competition principles.