How far will court judges go in their search for “precedents” to justify their restrictive and regressive court rulings, picking and choosing past decisions, no matter how obscure or discredited that can be twisted to affirm their beliefs? Gun safety regulations are being tossed now that the Supreme Court has issued a decision that instructs judges to look into history and tradition to weigh the constitutionality of gun control laws. Whose history? Whose tradition? The majority looked into gun laws dating to the 18th century for guidance ( when “militia” was still a plural noun) conveniently overlooking the fact that the guns of the 18th century were muskets and rifles, a far cry from the weapons of mass murder we have at our fingertips today. Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk cited the 1873 anti-vice Comstock Act that made it illegal to send “obscene, lewd or lascivious,” publications through the mail to justify his ruling to ban access to mifepristone across the country. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, not to be outdone, reached across the pond, citing a 17th century English ruling by Sir Matthew Hale that deemed giving women legally enforceable rights over their own bodies was a threat to men’s freedom to justify overturning Roe v Wade. This is the 21st century. Why are conservative judges miring us in the past to justify rulings that so critically affect our present, a present that has no resemblance to life hundreds of years ago? Times have changed and the conservative, largely white, largely male population that enjoyed supremacy in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries is being squeezed, asked to share their top spot on society’s ladder with others who want the same rights, privileges and freedoms. So these conservative, white male judges are putting on the brakes, picking and choosing obscure, musty, centuries-old rulings to justify their attempts to stem the tide of this societal shift, all to maintain their status in this changing quo with rulings that vilify and criminalize those who are not white, conservative, Christian, and straight, while making sure that guns are readily available to arm those who have been told repeatedly to fear anyone who is not just like them. And why stop now? Why not go further to maintain their white nationalism and revive the 1857 Dred Scott v Sanford decision that denied the legality of Black citizenship and ruled that an African American “had no rights which the white man was bound to respect?” These judges’ rulings are a travesty. America is different now. Get over it. We are a society of many colors, cultures, practices and beliefs, and all of us should have access to equal rights, freedom, and safety. These judges, and those who appointed them, believe that diversity and equality are a threat, and they have demonstrated that they have no qualms manipulating our legal system to ensure that their way forward is a step backward for the rest of us.