GOP will introduce a bill to codify 2A into law

I think that's a mistake, like admitting the Second Amendment to The Constitution doesn't mean what at clearly says.

Seems rather redundant to pass a law making Constitutional law... a law.

What's next? Codifying the Right to Free Speech?

The Founders already did that.

If dimocrap states are ignoring the Supreme court , why would they care about a federal law . Also it won't pass or biden will veto it .

Seems the thing that has worked was putting teeth in Florida’s preemption. I always thought it ironic how the dems always got all bent out of shape by a punishment being put in place it they don’t follow the law? I mean everywhere else there seems to be punishments assigned to breaking laws so why is this such an alien concept for them to grasp? 🤔

Seems our government officials should be the first ones upholding the laws?

Ok, ok, ok…I had a hard time typing that without LOL myself. But still…🤣

From the link "It would also give citizens the right to sue any government agency or official who tried to infringe on that right. "
That's not in the constitution. 2A Makes it illegal for the government to infringe but does not provide for citizens to sue for damages.

But as usual, this is politics. GOP does not have the ability to pass anything in the Senate. So they make Dems vote against the Constitution and the SCOTUS to use as campaign fodder.

Feel good legislation that has exactly 0% chance of passing.

What does it mean if something is codified?


To codify means to arrange laws, rules, or regulations into a systematic code. The process of codification can involve taking judicial decisions or legislative acts and turning them into codified law. This process does not necessarily create new law, it merely arranges existing law, usually by subject, into a code.

First reaction is I think it’s a bad idea…the Constitution and Bill of Rights trumps any law on the books (that was the intention at least) so making a law about following a amendment weakens the constitution and bill of rights

Wsr said:

First reaction is I think it’s a bad idea…the Constitution and Bill of Rights trumps any law on the books (that was the intention at least) so making a law about following a amendment weakens the constitution and bill of rights

Click to expand...

At the very least redundant. The Constitution IS the law for government to follow. Period. The end. We don't need to make it "illegaler" to infringe our Constitutionally-protected Rights.

Wsr said:

First reaction is I think it’s a bad idea…the Constitution and Bill of Rights trumps any law on the books (that was the intention at least) so making a law about following a amendment weakens the constitution and bill of rights

Click to expand...

That was my reaction, too as stated in post #2.

Wsr said:

First reaction is I think it’s a bad idea…the Constitution and Bill of Rights trumps any law on the books (that was the intention at least) so making a law about following a amendment weakens the constitution and bill of rights

Click to expand...

Codifying doesn't weaken the constitution one bit. It, as Racer pointed out, may be redundant but it's not weakening the doc in any way.

Wsr said:

First reaction is I think it’s a bad idea…the Constitution and Bill of Rights trumps any law on the books (that was the intention at least) so making a law about following a amendment weakens the constitution and bill of rights

Click to expand...

Well; the other side of that is that they’re not being enforced, or action taken against the transgressors.
That’s actually why I support the process. If it ever does pass; it’ll provide teeth to use against the transgressors.

What Florida did a number of years ago put an end to the local govt’s. ability to thumb their nose at the state laws by putting teeth in the legislation (which became state law) that provided a way to hold the butt-heads personally and officially liable for their actions.

It worked then; and it still does…

Exactly my point in post #5.

Rick McC. said:

Well; the other side of that is that they’re not being enforced, or action taken against the transgressors.
That’s actually why I support the process. If it ever does pass; it’ll provide teeth to use against the transgressors.

What Florida did a number of years ago put an end to the local govt’s. ability to thumb their nose at the state laws by putting teeth in the legislation (which became state law) that provided a way to hold the butt-heads personally and officially liable for their actions.

It worked then; and it still does…

Click to expand...

If there was any chance at codifying penalties into federal law for any federal, state, or local government official found violating the 2A or the supporting [redundant] "codified" law, I'd be supportive. However, it is infinitely more likely that the Sun will rise from the Western horizon than it is for a Bill "codifying" 2A into federal law to get anywhere unless and until there's strong conservative domination of both the U.S. House AND Senate AND there's a strong conservative, 2A respecting POTUS. Until then, this Bill is going nowhere!

^^^^ Well; the fact that they’re putting it out there should get a lot of folks attention (on both sides), and let “them“ know that we’re not going away.
To get anything done requires some folks who are willing to try…

Rick McC. said:

^^^^ Well; the fact that they’re putting it out there should get a lot of folks attention (on both sides), and let “them“ know that we’re not going away.
To get anything done requires some folks who are willing to try…

Click to expand...

I hear ya. The fictional wanne-be Spanish Knight Don Quixote was willing to try, too but in the current political environment, this effort by a few Republicans is also "tilting at windmills."