The world is becoming an increasingly dangerous place. Having just the slightest amount of power will leave you with a target on your back.
And this Supreme Court Justice was involved in a terrifying attack that has all hell breaking loose.
Thanks to the radical Left’s soft-on-crime policies, Democrat-controlled cities across the country are suffering heightened crime rates.
One of those cities is Washington, D.C., where multiple politicians have been the victims of carjackings and other violent crimes.
And this Supreme Court justice was the latest D.C. resident who very narrowly escaped being a victim of one of these violent crimes.
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s Armed Guard Involved in Shooting Despite Her Stance Against Private Gun Rights
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who has openly opposed the idea of a private right to armed self-defense, benefits from armed protection. This irony was highlighted in July when one of her guards thwarted a carjacking attempt outside her home.
According to the New York Post, the incident took place shortly after 1:00 a.m. on July 5.
Kenneth Flowers, an 18-year-old, allegedly threatened a U.S. Marshal assigned to protect Justice Sotomayor by pointing a gun at him.
The Marshal responded by firing at Flowers, causing non-life-threatening injuries.
This event brings to mind the Supreme Court’s 2010 McDonald v. Chicago decision, where a closely divided court ruled that Second Amendment rights are incorporated through the Fourteenth Amendment.
Justice Samuel Alito penned the majority opinion, while Justice John Paul Stevens and Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the dissents. Notably, Breyer’s dissent was supported by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor.
In their dissent, Breyer, Ginsburg, and Sotomayor argued, “I can find nothing in the Second Amendment’s text, history, or underlying rationale that could warrant characterizing it as ‘fundamental’ insofar as it seeks to protect the keeping and bearing of arms for private self-defense purposes.”
They criticized the earlier Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), emphasizing that “there is no popular consensus that the private self-defense right described in Heller is fundamental.”
In summing up their dissent, they asserted, “In sum, the Framers did not write the Second Amendment in order to protect a private right of armed self-defense. There has been, and is, no consensus that the right is, or was, ‘fundamental.’”
In 2010, Justice Sotomayor joined a dissenting opinion in McDonald v. Chicago that stated, “In sum, the Framers did not write the Second Amendment in order to protect a private right of armed self-defense.”
— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) July 9, 2024
Meanwhile, Sotomayor’s armed security team just sh*t a would-be… pic.twitter.com/d9CmFK76Yp
The recent shooting incident highlights the paradox of Sotomayor enjoying armed protection while maintaining that the Second Amendment does not guarantee a private right to self-defense.
But perhaps after what happened outside of Sotomayor’s home, she’ll change her tune on the Second Amendment.
However, it would be wise to not hold your breath on that.
Stay tuned to The Federalist Wire.
