Democrats hope to press the "affordability" issue in this year's midterm election season, but there'…
CFIF on X CFIF on YouTube
Inflation: Comparing Trump and Biden...

Democrats hope to press the "affordability" issue in this year's midterm election season, but there's one potentially glaring problem for them, as illustrated by our friends at Unleash Prosperity...

[caption id="" align="alignleft" width="668"] Biden Versus Trump on Inflation[/caption]

 …[more]

August 17, 2026 • 04:40 PM
Home Jester's Courtroom Lawsuit Backfires
Lawsuit Backfires Print
Monday, July 06 2015

A Brady Campaign-backed lawsuit has backfired on the parents of a victim who was killed in the Aurora, Colorado, movie theater attack.

In a recently released opinion, federal Judge Richard P. Matsch dismissed the lawsuit brought against online merchants who sold the perpetrator various items used in his crime. Ultimately, the court simply refused the plaintiffs' request to rewrite settled law to their liking and against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.

"To grant such relief this court must conduct hearings and make policy decisions that are within the authority of the political branches of government responsive to the people under our constitutional structure of representative government," Judge Matsch wrote. "The defendants' motions to dismiss must be granted because this court does not have the authority to grant the relief requested."

In addition to ruling in favor of the defendants, the court awarded defense costs and attorneys' fees totaling $203,001.86. "It is apparent that this case was filed to pursue the political purposes of the Brady Center," Judge Matsch stated, "and, given the failure to present any cognizable legal claim, bringing these defendants into the Colorado court where the prosecution of James Holmes was proceeding appears to be more of an opportunity to propagandize the public and stigmatize the defendants than to obtain a court order which counsel should have known would be outside the authority of this court."

Just who will ultimately foot the bill is unknown, but Judge Matsch also noted the close relationship of the named plaintiffs to the Brady Campaign itself.

The fee award is being appealed.

—Source: nraila.org

Notable Quote   
 
"The U.S. Supreme Court will kick off its 2026 term next week with what will be one of its biggest cases of the year. And according to several legal specialists, there's much more to the dispute than meets the eye.The case in question is Suncor v. Boulder, which deals with the lawfare that Boulder, Colorado, launched against Suncor Energy companies and the Exxon Mobil Corporation. The city is seeking…[more]
 
 
— Shawn Fleetwood, Teh Federalist
 
Liberty Poll   

Based on the meteoric development of AI, do you believe that your job is going to be threatened or enhanced?