Hate ads?! Want to be able to search and filter? Day and Night mode? Subscribe for just $5 a month!

First Amendment Attorney Gets Second Amendment All Wrong

Listen to Article

In a delicious twist of irony, First Amendment attorney Jack Greiner—champion of free speech battles—stumbled spectacularly into Second Amendment territory and emerged with a legal analysis that’s more fiction than fact. Greiner’s recent critique peddles the tired myth that the right to keep and bear arms is some narrow, collective privilege tied exclusively to a well-regulated militia, dismissing individual self-defense as a modern invention. Never mind Heller (2008), where the Supreme Court unequivocally affirmed an individual’s right to possess firearms unconnected to militia service, or the raft of historical precedents from Blackstone to the Founders’ own writings emphasizing personal arms for security against tyranny and crime. Greiner’s take reeks of selective reading, cherry-picking Federalist Papers snippets while ignoring the Amendment’s plain text and the Framers’ explicit intent to arm citizens as a bulwark against government overreach.

This isn’t just an academic fumble; it’s a symptom of the elite legal echo chamber where First Amendment heroes fancy themselves 2A experts without cracking a history book. Greiner’s gaffe underscores a broader cultural blind spot: even sharp legal minds can parrot anti-gun dogma when stepping outside their lane, fueling narratives that erode constitutional carry, standard-capacity magazines, and everyday carry rights. For the 2A community, it’s a rallying cry—double down on education. Arm yourselves with resources like the Cato Institute’s amicus briefs or Stephen Halbrook’s The Founders’ Second Amendment, and flood the discourse with irrefutable evidence. When attorneys like Greiner opine on guns, their First Amendment bravado collides with Second Amendment reality, reminding us why vigilance isn’t optional.

The implications ripple far: if unchecked, these misconceptions embolden judges and legislators to chip away at SCOTUS precedents like Bruen (2022), which demanded history and tradition over judicial balancing acts. 2A advocates, take note—this is prime content for memes, threads, and op-eds exposing the hypocrisy. Greiner’s misstep isn’t a setback; it’s ammunition. Let’s curate, share, and fortify the ramparts.

Share this story