The Court Trump Built Is Not Returning His Calls
Gun rights activists expected a victory lap. They got a quiet rejection and a GOP meltdown.
When the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Rhode Island’s high-capacity magazine ban challenge last week, it didn’t just sidestep a case; it pulled the trigger on a conservative meltdown. After all, this is their Court, handpicked and hand-packed, delivered by Trump and the Federalist Society on a silver gavel.
However, when it came time to follow through on the right’s post-Bruen dream of judicially bulldozing state gun laws, the Court blinked. Not once, but repeatedly, refusing to touch bans in Maryland, Delaware, and now Rhode Island. In a quiet moment that speaks volumes, the justices let those progressive laws stand.
What followed was a rare moment of friction within the right-wing machine, Trump furious at Leonard Leo, Barrett getting slammed for being insufficiently loyal, and Kavanaugh issuing a judicial shrug dressed up as concern.
We just hit 14,000 subscribers—thank you!
Get exclusive access for just $1/week or $52 a year.
Get exclusive analysis and fearless reporting you won’t find in corporate media.
The Sound of No Ruling
For decades, the conservative legal movement has treated the Second Amendment like holy scripture. With the 2022 Bruen decision, they thought they'd finally reached the promised land, a constitutional interpretation so expansive that state-level gun control would be left in ashes.
And yet, here we are. The Supreme Court has now declined to hear not one, not two, but three high-stakes gun rights challenges. These aren't fringe cases. They involve major questions about assault weapon bans, magazine limits, and the reach of Bruen. Instead of taking them up, the justices passed.
The implications are huge. Lower court rulings upholding gun control laws are now the law of the land in those jurisdictions. In legal terms, there is now precedent by absence. In political terms, it is a gut punch to the gun rights movement. What was supposed to be a judicial free-for-all has turned into... nothing.
And the silence? It’s deafening.
Barrett in the Crosshairs
When Amy Coney Barrett was rushed onto the Court in 2020, the conservative movement hailed her as the crown jewel of the Federalist Society pipeline, a faithful, unshakable, and ideologically pure figure. She was their conservative RBG, minus the dissents and with a more agreeable voting record.
Now? She's being labeled a traitor.
Barrett’s vote to deny the Court’s review of these gun rights cases has triggered a storm on the right. MAGA loyalists and gun rights activists are howling. Her silence on the Rhode Island and Maryland cases is being treated not as strategic restraint, but as apostasy.
In some corners of conservative Twitter, she’s been called everything from “the next John Roberts” (not a compliment) to a stealth liberal plant (completely unhinged). The National Association for Gun Rights didn’t name her directly, but their press release oozed with disappointment about the Court’s "abandonment" of Second Amendment defenders. The implication was clear.
While Barrett hasn’t spoken publicly, the message she’s sending from the bench is even louder: she’s not going to act as the gun lobby’s bench-warmer.
Whether this signals a genuine pivot toward judicial independence or merely a temporary, PR-safe dodge, we don't yet know. But one thing’s sure: the right is learning the hard way that once a justice has life tenure, they don’t have to answer to the base that got them there.
Kavanaugh’s Judicial Tightrope
If Barrett’s been catching fire, Brett Kavanaugh is busy trying to light a match and hide the evidence. In a curious concurring opinion, he agreed with the Court’s refusal to hear Rhode Island’s high-capacity magazine case, but took a moment to gently scold the lower courts for, essentially, not understanding Bruen properly.
To be clear, Kavanaugh said the lower courts got it wrong, but also said the Supreme Court shouldn’t do anything about it right now.
It’s the judicial equivalent of shrugging while whispering, “I’m with you, bro.”
This kind of sideline commentary might have played well in a less polarized era, but in today’s political climate, it's almost laughably tone-deaf. The gun rights movement isn’t asking for nuance. They’re demanding blood, figuratively, but with the Second Amendment, even that's not always clear.
What Kavanaugh seems to be doing is hedging. He’s trying to avoid the scorched-earth criticism Barrett is getting by throwing conservatives a few lines about how things should be interpreted, without actually committing to action. It’s a subtle wink to the base, a sort of “I feel your pain,” while still voting to do exactly what they don’t want.
In doing so, Kavanaugh risks the worst possible reputation: a justice who talks like Thomas but votes like Roberts, neither base nor institutionally adored, just floating somewhere in the mushy middle of performative concern and political calculation.
The conservative legal movement expected a warrior. What they got this week was a weathervane.
Trump vs. Leo: The Conservative Divorce
In a galaxy not so far away, the MAGA Death Star is turning its firepower on its own architects.
Leonard Leo, the longtime executive of the Federalist Society and the mastermind behind Trump's conservative judicial appointments, has become the latest target of Trump's wrath. Following a federal court's decision to block his sweeping tariffs, Trump unleashed a tirade on Truth Social, labeling Leo a "real 'sleazebag'" and a "bad person who, in his own way, probably hates America." He accused Leo of having "his own separate ambitions". He lamented, "I am so disappointed in The Federalist Society because of the bad advice they gave me on numerous Judicial Nominations. This is something that cannot be forgotten!"
For more information about Leonard Leo, see our coverage here:
This isn't just a personal spat. It's a seismic rift within the conservative movement. The very organization that helped Trump solidify a conservative majority on the Supreme Court is now being cast aside. Trump's grievances stem from judges, some of whom he appointed, ruling against his policies. He questioned the origins of these judges, asking, "Where do these initial three Judges come from? How is it possible for them to have potentially done such damage to the United States of America? Is it purely a hatred of 'TRUMP'?"
Leo, for his part, responded with his usual oily grace: "I'm very grateful for President Trump transforming the Federal Courts, and it was a privilege being involved. There's more work to be done, for sure..." etc.
This public fallout underscores a deeper ideological divide: Trump's demand for unwavering loyalty versus the conservative legal establishment's commitment to judicial independence. As the Sith Lords clash, the rest of us watch, popcorn in hand, as the empire they built begins to fracture.
A Moment to Push Forward
While the right devours its own over judicial loyalty tests and unmet ideological expectations, progressives should be taking notes and action.
This is a rare moment. The conservative legal machine, once thought unstoppable, is misfiring. The MAGA base is turning on its judicial champions. Trump is publicly eviscerating the very network that built the current Court. And in the middle of it all, the Supreme Court is letting gun safety laws stand, not as an act of liberalism, but as a cautious assertion of independence.
That might not last.
The silence from the Court is strategic, not sympathetic. They may be biding their time, letting lower courts refine post-Bruen doctrine before stepping in with a more aggressive agenda. Or they might be trying to preserve the Court’s already shaky legitimacy by avoiding overt culture war battles, at least for now.
But during this lull, the liberal movement has room to move. States can continue passing gun control laws with a bit more confidence. Legal strategists can prepare for the next round of fights. Activists should be loud, visible, and clear-eyed. This window won’t stay open forever.
The conservative movement is in a civil war. Let’s not waste the ceasefire.
Take Action: Don’t Just Watch—Push
While the conservative movement sorts out its identity crisis, we have work to do. Silence from the Supreme Court isn't the same as safety. It’s an opening, not a solution.
Call Your Members of Congress
Call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121 to be connected to your senators and representative.
Sample Script:
"Hi, my name is [Your Name], and I'm a constituent from [Your City, State]. I'm calling to urge [Senator/Representative Name] to support national legislation banning high-capacity magazines and expanding background checks. The Supreme Court’s recent refusal to overturn these laws shows we have momentum, and we need Congress to match that. Thank you."
Support Grassroots Legal Advocacy
Support the organizations doing the work on the ground and in the courts:
Giffords Law Center – Legal and policy advocacy for gun reform
Everytown for Gun Safety – Grassroots organizing and litigation
Alliance for Justice – Monitoring judicial nominations and court trends
The courts may be quiet, but this fight is far from over. Let’s make sure we’re louder.
We just hit 14,000 subscribers—thank you!
Get exclusive access for just $1/week or $52 a year.
Get exclusive analysis and fearless reporting you won’t find in corporate media.
Bibliography:
Amy Howe. “Supreme Court Declines to Hear Gun-Control Challenges.” SCOTUSblog, June 2, 2025.
“Supreme Court Leaves in Place Maryland's Ban on Assault-Style Rifles.” The Washington Post, June 2, 2025.
“Supreme Court Rejects 2 Gun Rights Cases, but Assault Weapons Ban Issue May Be Back Soon.” Associated Press, June 2, 2025.
Andrew Chung. “US Supreme Court Won't Review Assault Weapon, High-Capacity Magazine Bans.” Reuters, June 2, 2025.
Stephen Gutowski. “SCOTUS Declines AR-15, Magazine Ban Cases While Kavanaugh Promises Action Soon.” The Reload, June 2, 2025.
Gregory Svirnovskiy and Josh Gerstein. “Trump Goes After Leonard Leo and the Federalist Society in Fury over Court Ruling.” Politico, May 29, 2025.
“Trump Blames Conservative Legal World and One of Its Leaders for Tariffs Ruling.” The Washington Post, May 30, 2025.
“Trump Blasts 'Backroom Hustlers' in Legal Battle over Tariffs, Says US Will Lose 'Trillions'.” New York Post, May 29, 2025.
“Trump, Frustrated with Some Judges, Lashes Out at Former Ally and Conservative Activist Leonard Leo.” Associated Press, May 31, 2025.
“Trump's Angry New Tirade over Tariff Ruling Accidentally Says Too Much.” The New Republic, May 30, 2025.
“Trump Rages at His Own Appointed Judge in Explosive Tariff Tirade.” The Daily Beast, May 30, 2025.
“Trump Rips His Own Dark Money Buddy in Bonkers Rant over Tariff Losses.” The New Republic, May 30, 2025.
“Trump Lashes Out at Leonard Leo and Federalist Society over Tariff Ruling.” CBS News, May 29, 2025.
“Veteran Legal Conservatives Rush to Justice Barrett's Defense amid MAGA Backlash.” WRAL, April 2, 2025.
“Amy Coney Barrett on Guns.” Duke Center for Firearms Law, October 9, 2020.
“Judge Amy Coney Barrett's Views on the Second Amendment Are Extreme and Dangerous.” Everytown for Gun Safety, October 9, 2020.
“Everytown Statement: Senate Republicans Vote Judge Barrett Out of Judiciary Committee.” Moms Demand Action, October 22, 2020.
“Leonard Leo.” Wikipedia. Accessed June 2, 2025.
“Federalist Society.” Wikipedia. Accessed June 2, 2025.
“New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen.” Wikipedia. Accessed June 2, 2025.
 | A guest post by
|
because he did not built it the Cok bros did
Hopefully it's an opening.