USCCB Amicus in Viramontes vs. 27 States & CRPA: Self-Defense Rights vs. Moral Disarmament

[PeteT]

If you’ve been tracking the docket for Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops' (USCCB) brief deserves a hard look for how it tries to repackage interest-balancing.

The bishops claim neutrality, but their argument essentially demands local legislatures ban AR-15s by claiming hardware numbers don't matter if an arm is deemed "too lethal." The irony is thick: traditional Catholic doctrine (and Thomistic natural law) explicitly establishes self-defense as a grave duty when protecting others. Yet their brief suggests the state can deny peaceable citizens the modern standard defensive arm to satisfy collective public-safety theories.

The contrast between their brief and the pro-2A filings is stark:

• The USCCB: Relies on medieval church council bans (the 1139 crossbow decree) and localism to dilute Heller.
• 27 State AGs, U.S. Senators, DOJ & CRPA: Grounded firmly in Bruen’s historical test, pointing out that 20–30 million modern sporting rifles across 40+ states is the textbook definition of "common use."

CRPA’s participation is particularly critical here. After the 9th Circuit’s blatant maneuvering to stall and manipulate en banc panels in Duncan v. Bonta, SCOTUS taking a firm stand in Viramontes is the only way to stop hostile circuits from ignoring Supreme Court precedent entirely.

Put together a full breakdown taking apart the bishops' legal and theological positions:

USCCB AR-15 Brief: Bishops, Bruen & Viramontes

Check it out and let's discuss.