Dem. senator suggests 'revolt' is coming if SCOTUS doesn't rule for victory on gun control

May 15, 2023
Robert Ayers

U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) appeared to just threaten a "revolt" should the U.S. Supreme Court not give him and his fellow Democrats a victory on some gun control measures that they support. 

Murphy made the threat during an appearance Sunday on NBC's Meet the Press. 

"Popular revolt," "illegitimate court"

Here's what Murphy specifically said during his NBC appearance:

If the Supreme Court eventually says that states or the Congress can’t pass universal background checks or can’t take these assault weapons off the streets, I think there’s going to be a popular revolt over that policy.

It is not clear what exactly Murphy meant by a "popular revolt." He did not clarify his meaning. One has to wonder whether it would be similar to the violence we saw during the summer of 2020 or the violence we saw after the unprecedented leak of the U.S. Supreme Court's draft decision overturning Roe v. Wade. 

Murphy, however, didn't stop there. The congressman added, "a court that’s already pretty illegitimate, is going to be in full crisis mode."

Again, it's not immediately clear what Murphy means. But, it would not be unreasonable to interpret the statement as some kind of threat against the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court.


Murphy is well-known for being one of the Democrats' leading gun control advocates. And, what appears to have caused Murphy to lash out in this manner is the recently-decided case Fraser v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.

Last week, Judge Robert Payne - of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia - ruled that a federal law banning the sale of handguns to those between the ages of 18 to 20 violates the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Payne, in reaching his decision, relied on the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. In this case, the justices ruled that, when deciding a Second Amendment case, a court must consider the "historical tradition of firearm regulation."

That's what Payne did in Fraser. 

"Not consistent with our nation's history and tradition

In his ruling, Payne noted that the U.S. government failed to provide "any evidence of age-based restrictions on the purchase or sale of firearms from the colonial era, Founding, or Early Republic."

Payne thus concluded that the "Founders considered age-based regulations on the purchase of firearms to circumscribe the right to keep and bear arms confirmed by the Second Amendment."

Accordingly, Payne deemed the federal law unconstitutional.

And, that's why Murphy threw a tantrum on live television - it was at the prospect of more anti-gun control decisions like this one.

Latest News

© 2023 - Patriot News Alerts