Boo-Yah! More winning…
Thankfully it was the 5th Circuit and not the 9th or there would have been another outcome.
At the Fifth Circuit, the three-judge panel dismissed the appeal because merely claiming you are frightened of a possible outcome does not violate First Amendment protections.
— Deplorable News (@DeplorableNews) August 21, 2018
A longshot appeal to the Fifth Circuit, to stop Texas Campus carry, has been rejected by a unanimous three-judge panel of the Court. Three professors at the University of Texas had filed the case on novel grounds. From uscourts.gov:
Three professors from the University of Texas at Austin challenged a Texas law permitting the concealed carry of handguns on campus and a corresponding University policy prohibiting professors from banning such weapons in their classrooms. The professors argued that the law and policy violate the First Amendment, Second Amendment, and Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The district court dismissed the claims.
Two years ago, in July of 2016, three academics associated with the University of Texas sued the Texas AG, Ken Paxton, and several University of Texas officials. They were desperately attempting to stop Campus carry in Texas, where some students who had Texas carry permits were allowed to carry personal defensive firearms on campus. The firearms had to be concealed.
A year later, Judge Lee Yeakel dismissed the case, on the grounds that the plaintiffs had not suffered any harm. Therefore they had no standing to sue. The professors decided to appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. All of the professors are women. One, Dr. Glass, is a Liberal Arts Professor. The other two, Dr. Lisa Moore and Dr. Mia Carter, are professors of English. That may explain their ability to construct the novel arguments used in the case. […]
At the Fifth Circuit, the three-judge panel dismissed the appeal because merely claiming you are frightened of a possible outcome does not violate First Amendment protections. The Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to keep and bear arms, not the right of the state to restrict individuals from keeping and bearing arms. More
I’m sick of the Liberals twisting the First Amendment to mean they shouldn’t be subjected to anything they disagree with when the purpose of the First Amendment means the opposite of that intention.
It was to protect the “offenders” rights. Your rights end where another person’s rights begin. And sorry if that offends you special snowflakes but everyone in America has rights!
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com