Well gang, the Delaware District Court got it wrong again.  This time with the denial of Hunter Biden's challenge to the charge for possessing a firearm as an unlawful user of controlled substances. As you may recall, last year, the Fifth Circuit Court of appeals decided the case of United States v. Daniels which held 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(3) unconstitutional as applied.  Section 922(g)(3) is the one that says a person may not possess a firearm if they are an unlawful user of controlled substances.  In that case, the defendant was stopped for a minor traffic violation and was found to be in possession of a de minimis quantity of marijuana, a pistol, and a rifle.  He was convicted under Section 922(g)(3) and later appealed to the Fifth Circuit which reversed and vacated the conviction as Section 922(g)(3) was unconstitutional as applied.  In the Biden case, the attorney got a bit too ambitious and argued that Section 922(g)(3) is facially unconstitutional, and by using rather lazy analogical analysis under Heller and Bruen, the presiding Delaware District Court judge denied the motion without prejudice.  While this is a bit of a set back, it left the door open for an as applied challenge at the close of the Government's case in chief.  Stay tuned for more.  If anyone wants to look over the opinion, I can link it here in a reply. 

The left is indeed trying to stifle his rulings, but they're also trying to do so by throwing the proverbial poo at the wall to see what sticks.  If they had half a brain between them all, they'd know that having a United States District judge voluntarily recuse himself from criminal proceedings would accomplish the opposite of their goal with respect to advancing gun control measures.  If they were smart (and they're not), they'd have found a way to have him recuse himself from presiding over civil cases.  Fortunately for us, the left has made their bed and now they've got to sleep in it given that United States District judges are appointed to a life term.  It would take far more serious misconduct for a judge to be removed from the bench.

Thanks, Mark, for your observation.  But as seems the course, the left is trying to stifle his opinion and put him in his place.

Judge Roger Benitez of the 9th Federal Circuit has been disciplined and sanctioned to trying to send a message to the at risk daughter of a defendant. 

Judge Benitez has consistently upheld second amendment rights in the liberal ninth circuit and he is despised by the enemies of freedom.

Obviously  this sanctioning is meant to stifle Judge Benitez.



https://www.cbs8.com/article/news/local/san-diego-federal-judge-disciplined-for-misconduct/509-c3af0abe-2891-48da-8484-ee383e049112

I would ad an amendment to allow someone to ban themselves from being on a high bridge.  Or owning a piece of rope.

Also ban themselves from owning a knife, scissors, and most over the counter cold medications.