St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her just dropped a bombshell on CNN’s News Central, admitting that her city’s lawsuit against the federal government—teaming up with other sanctuary cities to block ICE enforcement—has zero legal precedent. Why? Because, as she put it, there simply isn’t one for courts to lean on. This isn’t some rogue legal Hail Mary; it’s a calculated bid to *create* precedent from scratch, forcing judges to invent new rules that hamstring federal immigration law. Her candid confession exposes the raw strategy: sue first, justify later, and hope activist courts rewrite the Constitution on the fly.

For the 2A community, this is a flashing red warning light. If cities can brazenly sue to neuter federal enforcement of immigration statutes—laws passed by Congress and signed by presidents—without precedent, what’s stopping blue-city mayors from suing to block ATF rules on ghost guns, pistol braces, or bump stocks? We’ve already seen Chicago and New York weaponize local ordinances against federal gun rights, but this escalates it: a direct assault on federal supremacy, cloaked as progressive resistance. The irony? These same officials cry precedent! when SCOTUS strikes down their gun grabs (think Bruen), yet they’re fine fabricating it to protect illegal aliens while disarming law-abiding citizens. It’s a dangerous game of selective federalism that erodes the rule of law.

The implications ripple far: expect a flood of copycat suits from gun-control havens like San Francisco or Boston, challenging Trump-era deregulations or even challenging the feds’ authority under the Commerce Clause to regulate interstate firearms sales. 2A warriors, this is our cue to rally—support pro-enforcement candidates, fund amicus briefs in these cases, and hammer home the hypocrisy. If precedent is so malleable for open borders, we’ll make sure it’s ironclad for the Second Amendment. Stay vigilant; the battle for federal authority is just heating up.