Hope in Sight? Lawsuit Filed Challenging Obama’s Anti-Second Amendment Executive Orders

It has been a tough week for President Obama and his unconstitutional agenda that is dedicated to the eradication of the separation of powers that is integral to our continuation as a republic. The Constitution is specific in its allocation of powers to different branches of government and Obama has repeatedly violated these constitutional protections in his quest to serve as both executive and lawmaker.

Now, the third branch of government, the judicial branch, is taking-on Obama’s usurpation of power.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case pertaining to Obama’s illegal executive order which granted amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants who came here and stayed in violation of our nation’s laws. Obama had urged for immigration reform to reward these illegals, but in the face of congressional refusal to do so, proceeded to grant amnesty unilaterally.

Also on Tuesday, the first lawsuit challenging Obama’s executive anti-Second Amendment orders emerged in court. Obama had urged for increased laws to undermine the Second Amendment. After repeated attempts and refusals by the legislative branch to revoke freedoms deemed uninfringeable by the Constitution, Obama issued edicts on January 5th, 2016, expanding background check provisions in addition to other measures aimed at curbing constitutional protections of individual firearm ownership.

On Tuesday, the conservative advocacy group Freedom Watch announced it was filing a lawsuit against the Obama administration in an effort to stop the unconstitutional orders.

Larry Klayman, the founder of Freedom Watch, blasted Obama for his illegal overreach, saying,

“The president states that he is doing so purely because he does not like the legislative decisions of the Congress.”

“These actions are unconstitutional abuses of the president’s and executive branch’s role in our nation’s constitutional architecture and exceed the powers of the president as set forth in the U.S. Constitution,” he continued.

“It is clearly arbitrary and capricious for the defendants, each and every one of them, to now suddenly adopt and implement a new and different interpretation for no other reason than the political preferences of temporary occupants of elected office,” Klayman further stated.

The lawsuit, which names as defendants Obama, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and ATF Director Thomas Brandon, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida and is expected to be followed by several more lawsuits challenging Obama’s edicts.

Whether one agrees with the steps advocated for by the president or not, there remains few things so dangerous to a republic as an executive drunk on power and willing to stray from the constitutional bounds upon his office. Just as it would be wrong for a senator to command a military, the executive cannot create laws and is duty-bound to enforce the las which have been constitutionally-created.

About the Author

Greg Campbell
Greg Campbell
An unapologetic patriot and conservative, Greg emerged within the blossoming Tea Party Movement as a political analyst dedicated to educating and advocating for the preservation of our constitutional principles and a free-market solution to problems birthed by economic liberalism. From authoring scathing commentaries to conducting interviews with some of the biggest names in politics today including party leaders, activists and conservative media personalities, Greg has worked to counter the left’s media narratives with truthful discussions of the biggest issues affecting Americans today. Greg’s primary area of focus is Second Amendment issues and the advancement of honest discussion concerning the constitutional right that protects all others. He lives in the Northwest with his wife, Heather, and enjoys writing, marksmanship and the outdoors.

Send this to friend