Professor Ponders if We’re In ‘Second Amendment Territory’

The Founding Fathers preserved the right to keep and bear arms because, in short, they wanted us to be able to overthrow the government. They knew that, regardless of the words on the page, the Constitution would be insufficient to prevent tyranny from rising all on its own. It needed just the checks and balances built into the document, but also the ultimate check on tyranny: A well-armed population.

But for years, we’ve been told that our AR-15s are insufficient to take on the United States military. Joe Biden himself argued that we’d need F-18s to have a chance. Rep. Eric Swalwell famously said he wasn’t worried because the United States government has nukes.

Now, though? Now, guns are sufficient to overthrow the government, but only because Trump is in office, apparently.

A climate professor from the University of Pennsylvania suggested the country is in “second amendment territory” if President Donald Trump does not comply with a federal judge’s ruling to halt the dismantling of the Education Department.

“If Trump doesn’t comply, we’re in second amendment territory,” Professor Michael Mann wrote on Bluesky on Thursday, prompting backlash.

Several high-profile observers took it to mean he was calling for armed resistance, and he has since deleted his post, Headline USA reported.

“The second amendment refers to the right of the people to rise up and defend democracy,” he wrote in a second post Friday. “To argue this is a threat against Trump is very dishonest.”

“Hi @FBI, this climate scientist and professor at @Penn appears to be calling to kiII Trump and Trump officials,” Libs of TikTok wrote on X in response to the post. 

Mann’s remarks were prompted by a federal judge’s recent decision to block President Trump’s efforts to dismantle the Education Department, issuing an injunction that halts the mass termination of over 1,300 employees and orders their reinstatement.

In October, the University of Pennsylvania appointed Mann its first vice provost for climate science, policy, and action.

Now, I’m not going to get into whether it was a threat against Trump specifically or not, because there are other people talking about that aplenty. I will say, though, that I find this entire thing downright hilarious.

Biden, as president, ignored the courts multiple times in his effort to just write off student loans. While that’s not the end of the republic by any means, neither would Trump ignoring the courts be. Not by any stretch of the imagination. Hell, Andrew Jackson ignored the Supreme Court and got his face on the $20 bill.

But because it’s Trump, suddenly we’re not Second Amendment territory, as Mann put it?

No, we’re not, and he needs to be damn glad we’re not. 

The people who bluster for a civil war have never actually studied civil wars. They’re not particularly civil, for one thing. In fact, they’re particularly vicious. If it were to happen, it wouldn’t be the North and the South standing in straight lines and shooting at one another while trying to comport themselves as gentlemen. It’ll look like Iraq or Afghanistan, where cars explode, IEDs litter the roadways, and small groups attack and kill civilians who happen to show too much support to the wrong side.

It’ll be ugly.

The Second Amendment is there for that purpose, but if anyone is willing to kill another over the Department of Education, then they’re someone who shouldn’t be taken seriously at all over anything.

In fact, a padded room and a jacket that allows the individual to hug themselves all day long might be in order.