Sen. Elizabeth Warren is one of the more left-leaning lawmakers in American politics. She’d probably the most leftward if Bernie Sanders didn’t exist, but he does, so she has to settle for second place.

And that’s not exactly a prize.

As with most Democrats in Congress, she’s vehemently anti-gun. She’s been anti-gun for a while and has supported pretty much every anti-gun measure that’s popped up.

That includes the doomed assault weapon ban from last week.

But now, it seems, she’s got her own anti-gun bill, and this is an absolute trainwreck from the standpoint of constitutionality.

In an alarming move, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) have reintroduced a legislative monster, the Gun Violence Prevention and Community Safety Act, under the guise of public safety. This bill is not a mere regulation; it is a sledgehammer to the Second Amendment , threatening to crush the constitutional rights that have been a cornerstone of American liberty.

By imposing extensive bans on various firearms and accessories, mandating prolonged waiting periods, and introducing onerous licensing and registration requirements, the bill significantly impedes the fundamental right to bear arms. Provisions such as banning “military-style” firearms and subjective bans on firearm accessories set a dangerous precedent of ambiguity and overreach.

Additionally, raising the minimum age for firearm purchases to 21 creates an illogical paradox where young adults can serve in the military or law enforcement but are denied the right to own firearms for self-defense or recreational use. The act’s expansion of red flag laws poses a significant threat to individual rights, allowing for gun confiscation without due process. The establishment of a federal gun licensing and registration system, coupled with the bolstered authority and funding of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, mirrors the tactics of an oppressive regime rather than a democratic government, infringing upon the constitutional rights enshrined in the Second Amendment.

This act, in essence, represents not just a regulatory measure, but a fundamental reshaping of gun ownership, challenging the core principles of individual freedom and self-defense. Regulators must strike it down.

OK, so all of this is telling us how bad it is, but what’s actually in it? The above alludes to certain aspects, but I’m going to turn to Warren and Johnson’s own press release to break down the bill.

The Gun Violence Prevention and Community Safety Act would help address this deadly crisis. The bill would:

• Create a federal gun licensing system and require a federal or state-issued firearms license to purchase or own a gun and establish a grant program to help states set up their own systems.
• Require universal background checks, close legal loopholes that allow individuals to skirt background check requirements and require background check denials to be reported to law enforcement.
• Keep guns out of the wrong hands by banning individuals who present safety risks from buying guns, establishing Extreme Risk Protection Order systems, and cracking down on gun theft.
• Ensure guns are used and stored responsibly by raising the minimum age for all gun or ammunition purchases to 21, establishing a 7-day waiting period for the purchase of all guns, strengthening gun storage laws, and banning guns on all school campuses.
• Keep weapons of war off our streets by banning military-style assault weapons, lethal gun accessories, and untraceable and undetectable firearms.
• Crack down on gun trafficking by banning bulk gun purchases and establishing a new law to specifically ban gun trafficking.
• Improve oversight of gun dealers by strengthening ATF’s authority to inspect gun shops, enhancing record-keeping requirements for gun dealers, and repealing harmful appropriations riders that limit law enforcement’s ability to trace guns that are used in crimes and hold gun dealers accountable when they break the law.
• Hold the gun industry accountable by clarifying that gun manufacturers can be held liable for civil penalties for the harms their guns cause, authorizing the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission to address safety defects in firearms and firearm accessories, and raising the excise tax on gun sales to 30% and ammunition sales to 50%.
• Invest in research and community-based gun violence prevention by providing $120 million in annual funding for federal research into gun violence and creating a new grant program to provide $120 million per year for gun violence intervention programs.

That’s right, ladies and gents. It would require gun licenses just to keep what you already own, mandate how your firearms must be stored without any regard for your personal circumstances, ban so-called assault weapons, and so much more.

I have to also think “ban bulk purchases” is basically just gun rationing, and at a level that will impact most lawful gun buyers and not just those who buy dozens upon dozens of guns at a single stretch.

Now, this is at the same time the GOSAFE Act is floating around the Senate, which makes this something of a competing bill, but it’s also entirely likely that many who support Warren and Johnson’s bill will also support Sen. Angus King’s anti-gun travesty.

It’s amazing to me, though, how little these lawmakers are actually paying attention to the Bruen decision. There’s nothing in this bill that remotely even looks like something from around the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification.

Of course, this is Elizabeth Warren and Hank Johnson we’re talking about here.

Johnson is perhaps best known for his concern about Guam tipping over due to the Navy having too many people on the island and Warren is best known for her 1/1024th Native American heritage “validating” her claims of being an American Indian.

Since basic facts and reason have clearly evaded these two for so long, we shouldn’t be overly surprised that they would put forth a bill like this and actually think it would survive constitutional muster.

If there’s good news in this, it’s that this doesn’t have a hope in hell of passing.

The Senate already made their feelings known on an assault weapon ban that was less restrictive than this abomination, so it’s unlikely the filibuster won’t come out for this one, and the House isn’t even under Democratic control, so there’s no chance of it passing there, either.

But it’s telling just how little attention anti-gun lawmakers are willing to pay the Supreme Court.