Judge Robert C. “Brunes” Brunetti (courtesy newstimes.com)

We’re a bit late to this story (in Internet terms) but at least we got there. The same cannot be said for the Constitution State’s mainstream media. Here’s a press release from Connecticut Carry, Inc.: [h/t SS]

During a closed door meeting in the judge’s chambers during a case Judge Robert C. “Brunes” Brunetti exposed his bigotry for fundamental civil rights in front of at least three defense attorneys. The violation came during the case of State of Connecticut v. Bruce Worley, docket number H17B-CR13-0055722S . . .

Judge Brunetti expressed his contempt for the right to keep and bear arms, as spelled out in both the Second Amendment to the US constitution and Article 1, Section 15 of the Connecticut Constitution by stating in chambers that “No one in this country should have guns” and that he ‘never returns guns’. A judge’s role is to be impartial and to render verdicts, rulings and judgments based upon law and case law, certainly not personal opinion.

The amazing part of Judge Brunetti’s comments is that he is a sitting judge in Connecticut in 2013 after this issue has been so clearly mandated upon him by the Supreme Court of the United States on several occasions including both DC v Heller cases, McDonald v Chicago and others. Judge Brunetti has clearly decided to lead an anti-rights crusade under color of his judicial position and it must end.

Connecticut Carry Director Edward Peruta was on scene in the courthouse that day and he informed several news outlets including WTIC Fox 61, WTNH ABC 8 and the Hartford Courant who all, to our disappointment, responded that they did not have the personnel to cover such an important topic in such an important context. The citizens of Connecticut have a right to know about Judge Brunetti, who is the second judge that Connecticut Carry has caught and called out for openly advocating against settled civil rights in this state. How many more judges in Connecticut are abusing their authority like this when these judges are so willing to openly flaunt their bigotry?

It is time for Judge Robert C. Brunetti to step down as a Connecticut judge. There is no place in Connecticut for a judge who will so willingly contradict The Supreme Court’s ruling on such an important civil right.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

96 COMMENTS

      • I think 91 or 94% of Connecticut voters voted for Obama in 2012. Connecticut is probably a bigger Dem stronghold than Mass and California in terms of the percent of the population.

        • More like 58 to 41 percent in Obama’s favor. Outside of the cities much of the state tends to split more evenly. He didn’t get more than 62% in one county (Hartford) and Romney won Litchfield county at 51%, with the others at about 55% of the vote for Obama. Our governor went to the democrat by only a fraction of a percent. We’re not all gun fearing liberals in this state (even some of my liberal friends do not like the new laws). Unfortunately the office tends to corrupt the republican governors we have had which then poisons the mood of the electorate when voting time comes. The democrats are just as or more corrupt, but this doesn’t get as much mention.

  3. The Hartford Courant is owned by the same company as the LA Times and Chicago Tribune. Connect the dots.

  4. So, when our military is disarmed, is this judge going to protect us all from invaders?

    No? Then maybe that judge should crack open a history book and do everyone a favor and get educated. And be disbarred for uttering something so moronic that it invalidates their office.

    The excuse I can fathom for saying such a thing is early onset senility.

    • Not sure on CT law (or how to spell out Connecticut?), but I suspect the BAR association has little to do with it and he would have to be impeached by some legal government authority. Good luck with that.

  8. Not from CT, but how do we help get this person which professes to be a judge of the bench?

    Does our Constitution and Bill of Rights carry “any weight”?

    • To answer your first question, do not elect politicians who are against our rights who then elect these judges. It starts with the people we elect.

    • “… Worthless P.O.S. …”

      Beat me to it.

      “… A judge’s role is to be impartial and to render verdicts, rulings and judgments based upon law and case law, certainly not personal opinion. …

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now THAT is some funny stuff.

  12. If this “judge” said that nobody has the right to free speech or that nobody has the right to resist any search would he be allowed to keep his job?

  14. I might have missed something, how is this any different than any other liberal judge legislating from the bench?

    Everything I’ve ever read suggested the founders single biggest fear was an overreaching executive. I can only imagine their shock at how the court system has run amok.

  15. Wow!!! And many people still disbelieve that this is happening to America. I wonder how many people he railroaded because of his agenda. All the cases he worked need to be reviewed, and retried if necessary.

  16. What a despicable person. Imagine the media frenzy that would have occurred if he had said “No one in this country should be gay” or “No one in this country should be Muslim”, yet people don’t bat an eye if he hates guns.

    • What if he said no one should be heterosexual? Or petition the government for redress of grievances? The list could go on and on because he is judging according to his personal prejudices and not according to the law or The Constitution of the United States of America, or of Connecticut.

  17. I think all judges should lose the robe and be forced to sit on the bench in their underwear. Too many seem to think that once they put on that robe they are better than all the rest of us and above reproach.

    They are supposed to be impartial, not God or even Solomon. And that whole “Your Honor” thing annoys me as well.

    • Dont rise for them when they enter the courtroom. They hate that. But it is not required. “Please rise for the honorable so and so” How do i know theyre honorable? Until then i refuse to rise.

      • Don’t use their government titles either. If you must speak to them, just speak to them or address them by their name, not “Judge”, “Judge Smith”, or “Your Honor”.

      • You mean when the bailiff dictates, “All rise!”, that is not an enforceable command? Real question.

        Anyway, this Judge Brunetti needs to be called out someway, somehow. Twitter, Facebook, anything until he’s screaming for the DOJ to provide armed bodyguards.

        Looks like a jerk in that pic, IMO.

  19. Hey can rule however he wants according to judicial legislation if this is a Conn. Supreme Court case in which the jurisdiction is on state laws. If it is state and if its in the Supreme Court of Conn., he can rule however he wants on state law since it is the supreme court for the state. His actions; however, do not make it right. It is clear that he has a clear disdain for the 2nd Amendment, which is very scary since he is a judge. If he is a simple trial court judge or court of appeals, then any decision he makes can be appealed to the Conn. appellate courts or supreme court of Conn if the issue is with the state Constitution and guns. If it deals with the Federal Consitution some one may appeal it all the way to the SCOTUS, with a writ of certiorari, but with the Heller decision it is likely that a Circuit or District court judge would rule as SCOTUS did in the Heller case. (disclaimer I am a 1st year law student so I hope that made sense. I am mentally fuzzy from studying)

  20. OK, this story really, really pissed me off. DagNabIt to Heck, what is wrong with our nation when JUDGES are so freakin’ clueless about the Second Ammendment.

    OK, there, I feel a bit better. Back now to my relaxing with my cigar, and yes, I have my EDC with me.

    So, dear Judge, please stick that where the sun don’t shine. No, wait, on second thought, don’t do that. It would mess up my handgun and it may go off.

    We would NOT want that to happen. Oh, no, we would not. The four laws and all.

  21. Voting matters… there needs to be a mental exam to allow people to vote because clearly most are too stupid.

    • I’ll see that wager, and raise to $1000.

      What he actually means is, “non-special people shouldn’t have guns.”

  30. No one in this country should have judges like him officiating over their case deciding their fate and impounding their guns

  31. Something tells me that if he had refused to marry a gay couple he’d have been booted of the bench already. Maybe if the last few remaining Connecticut gun owners make a big enough stink… If nothing else he seems to have set himself up for a lot of his cases being overturned on appeal.

  32. This Judge should be disbarred and stripped of any retirement benefits for flagrantly violating the oath he swore to uphold. Furthermore, taking guns from The People will not keep them out of hands of criminals because many illegal weapons are sourced from military and police armories around the U.S. and the world. By his logic, the police nor military should have them either. Period.

  33. It would seem to me that such an utterance while in his official capacity would be enough to insist he recuse himself from any case that had anything whatsoever to do with a firearm or else provide immediate and likely successful grounds for an appeal.

    It would also seem that he has deprived many people of their property and rights under color of law and ought to be investigated for what would seem to be widespread civil rights violations.

    If he remains on the bench it would constitute a tragedy, and cross a tripwire which ought not be ignored.

    • Based on what? When a Judge takes his position he come with his own bias. What does the whole damn state have to do with this one person? We lost the last governorship by less than 1% and because of some hokey polling in Bridgeport where like Chicago the dead sometime are able to vote.

      Like in many other states, the hard liberal cities and BS district lines make it hard for the right people to win elections.

      • Because modern liberals were exactly what was being discussed when the famous remark about surrendering liberty for safety were penned. Because without progressive liberalism, and it’s collectivists statist doctrine there would be no movement for gun control in this country. Because when a majority votes for liberals, progressives, statists, and collectivists they deserve neither safety nor freedom, and in this case they have neither.

      • because once the voting is over with, there is but one state, with no political affiliation. and whether you like it or not, you are responsible for who is in office, and who is appointed to the bench.

  35. connectiucut judge loves to be like obama dictator the will of the voters are who should decide if we have guns or not I will bet the judge has armed security why is his life more important then mine or my babies

  36. Rather than write another long post describing how much I hate this state, I’ll leave it at the following:

    Hi, I live in CT.

  39. I would bet you $5 that he’s armed while he is sitting on that bench (most judges are) and if not he’s got armed bailiffs in the courtroom. He things nobody should have guns, he should lead by example.

    • they never lead by example they believe rules & laws are for everyone else while they are armed everywhere and they will use excuse they are judges or goverment workers

  40. I bet this guy is the poster child of the liberals. What a moron. And to think he sits in judgement on anyone. What a waste of oxygen.

  41. No one in this country should have judges like you.You get paid to uphold the Constitution,if you don’t like that go dig ditches where no one cares what you think!

  42. Bad politicians make bad laws and elect bad judges. As gun owners, it is our responsibility to be politically active and make sure that these politicians and therefore Judges are not elected.

    You can say your vote does not count, but you would be wrong. Look at Colorado.

    As a group, a community we like nothing more than to be left alone, and this is where the progressives and anti-gunners win because they will be more than happy to determine the politics. In a perfect world, the constitution would be followed and we would not have to worry, but the reality is there are left progressive ant-gunners who keep calling the constitution “just some old piece of paper” that does not matter. We have to remind them at the polls that it does matter.

  43. TTAG, you guys really, REALLY need some social buttons on your stories. Currently posting the link of this to my Facebook, if you had the button option I’d happily use it.

  44. Weeelll… If noone had guns, including die Polizei and the military — presupposing that foreign militaries and any invading bug-eyed sausages (yes, I meant to say sausages) went similarly without — then they’d not be in common use and indeed no one should then have them.

    Since that ain’t gonna happen, let’s just say instead that no bigot should be a judge — even in Connecticut.

  45. Judge Brunetti is just another example of how Jewish lawyers are screwing up America.

    /oh wait, he isn’t Jewish…

  46. Perhaps we should get back to the practice of IMPEACHING judges who do not uphold their oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution. Unless and until WE THE PEOPLE stand up, and remove a few of these folks from office they will continue to erode our rights. But then again maybe that won’t work..didn’t the Colorado Legislator say that her ban had nothing to do with her recall ? Perhaps they aren’t smart enough to realize that we cherish our God Given Liberties more than their “service”.

    • At the Federal level, Impeaching by Congress and removal by The Senate is an option. It has been done about 3 times in history. However, Alcee Hastings was a Federal Judge in Florida. He was impeached, removed from office and disbarred and convicted on racketeering charges with the mob. He got elected to the U.S. House and was pardoned by Slick Willy so he could be Sworn in in 1993. He has been in congress ever since.

  47. What’s interesting is that everyone is under the impression that the Court Officers whom are called Judicial Marshals are armed.

    They are not armed at all. Not one Judicial Marshal has a firearm and they operate the security for the court and prisoner transport. How safe is that.?

    ALSO. That picture is of Judge Robert Devlin, not Brunetti. Please research properly.

  48. I can’t imagine what his butt frustration is going to be like when all our new gun laws get overturned.

    And all those new outlets that say they didn’t have the personnel to cover it… BULLSHIT! And everyone knows it.

  50. He’s retiring in December this year.

    On Feb. 21, 2013, Brunetti wrote to Chief Court Administrator Barbara Quinn: “I plan on retiring in December 2013.” By that time, Brunetti could be eligible for a 30-year state pension.

    • Lets hope he doesn’t end up on the SCOTUS. I would like to see Janine Pirro go head to head with this turkey in a debate.

  52. It is amazing to me that these people have but one thing to uphold, one job for the people of this and they choose to manipulate their own agenda! They forget the framework for America is directed to benefit the American people…… no one else! Failure to serve the people is grounds for these politicians, appointees, and public servants to be stripped of their jobs, income, retirements!! They need to feel the power of the people!

  53. And this AZZZZ now sits on our Board of Directors in Tennessee. Why didn’t he just stay put in his little Liberal Utopia

Comments are closed.