By Duncan Smith

In response to endless Democratic attempts to take away Americans’ guns using every legislative trick in the book, there was a massive push beginning a few years ago to take a page out of the left-wing immigration ‘sanctuary city’ playbook and apply it to the Second Amendment.

Hence, “Second Amendment Sanctuaries” were born.

The concept was the same: Declared jurisdictions simply would not allow their local law enforcement personnel to cooperate with federal agents attempting to enforce gun control laws.

The movement really took off in recent months as the Biden regime and Commie Dems controlling Congress made renewed calls and pushes for gutting the Second Amendment without repealing it — like, allowing gun crime survivors to sue gun makers, which will effectively put them out of business and prevent any overseas gunmakers from selling in the U.S. market.

Now, a state judge in Oregon has given the ‘gun sanctuary’ movement some good news.

The Washington Examiner reported:

An Oregon judge sided against local officials and a gun control group on Thursday as he dismissed a challenge to a Second Amendment sanctuary ordinance that was previously approved by voters.

Columbia County Board of Commissioners requested a court review of the Second Amendment Sanctuary Ordinance on May 25, which prohibits law enforcement in the locality from enforcing most federal gun control provisions. Officials at the time did not seek to “invalidate” the proposal. Instead, they sought to “get answers to the many legal questions raised by it.”

Everytown for Gun Safety, a gun control advocacy group, and Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum then entered their own court filings in opposition to the sanctuary ordinance. Despite their opposition, Judge Ted Grove ruled no “justiciable controversy” was present to warrant a legal decision on the matter.

“While a governing body may seek review of an ordinance, even one that incorporates initiative measures, judicial examination still requires a justiciable controversy,” Grove wrote. “Petitioners have not demonstrated such a controversy.”

“Petitioners do not seek to defend their ordinance from a challenge or resolve some conflict between parties,” he added. “They do not attempt to overcome resistance from the Sheriff or State Police, nor, as apparent from their pleadings, would they defend their ordinance at all even if challenged.”

Granted, this is just Oregon.

But court rulings on issues amount to precedent, and that is often what other judges rely on, in addition to their own state or federal statutes, to decide cases.

Overall then, this is a great news for Americans who are trying to shore up the Second Amendment.

Inflationary pressures KEEP buillding in Biden's Economy...Is He Going to Destroy It and Break the Back of Consumers?

Supply chains around the world continue to be bottlenecked...

Don't let yourself be UNPREPARED for the financial reset that IS coming

You have exactly zero time to waste...

Download your Ultimate Reset Guide Now!
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x