NYSRPA v. Cuomo

[Maestro Pistolero]

Did I not already describe how Heller does precisely that?

Yes. Apparently you forget that we disagree on this point. I'm not interested in beating that horse with you again.

 

[Dingo3]

Did I not already describe how Heller does precisely that?

I don't know. You allegedly describe a lot of things but none of it actually makes sense to anyone. It seems as if nothing makes any sense to yourself, either.

 

[kcbrown]

Yes. Apparently you forget that we disagree on this point. I'm not interested in beating that horse with you again.

No worries. I know we disagree on that point. My point is that you shouldn't be surprised about how things are going with respect to militia weapons precisely because of that.

Put another way, you and I may disagree on what Heller means in that context, but it should be no surprise whatsoever if a hostile court treats the prefatory clause as having no effect precisely because such a reading of Heller is POSSIBLE.



(Sent with Tapatalk, so apologies for the lackluster formatting)

 

[Maestro Pistolero]

No worries. I know we disagree on that point. My point is that you shouldn't be surprised about how things are going with respect to militia weapons precisely because of that.

Put another way, you and I may disagree on what Heller means in that context, but it should be no surprise whatsoever if a hostile court treats the prefatory clause as having no effect precisely because such a reading of Heller is POSSIBLE.



(Sent with Tapatalk, so apologies for the lackluster formatting)

Agreed. Once a federal court has decided, at least in effect, that Heller meant that there is no absolute right to carry outside the home in some manner by non-prohibited licensed individuals in non-sensitive places, everything else was pretty much off the table.

The best thing that could happen might well be that no 2A cases are taken until and unless there is a positive shift in the makeup of SCOTUS.

 

[BeoBill]

Volokh weighs in:

2nd Circuit upholds N.Y. and Conn. arms bans; contradicts Heller and McDonald
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...d-conn-arms-bans-contradicts-heller-mcdonald/

The 2nd Circuit decision exemplifies the pattern in many lower federal courts of defying the Supreme Court’s admonition in McDonald v. Chicago that the Second Amendment is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.” The approach of some lower courts seems to be that Heller stands for little beyond its holding that handgun bans are unconstitutional. In Heller, the court chastised lower courts for having “overread” the court’s 1939 decision in United States v. Miller; the Miller court had upheld the federal tax and registration system for sawed-off shotguns, but many lower courts asserted that Miller had ruled that the Second Amendment is a “collective right” that no individual can assert. Among the lower courts which, according to Heller, placed “erroneous reliance” on an incorrect interpretation of Miller, was the 2nd Circuit, in United States v. Scanio, No. 97–1584, 1998 WL 802060 (2d Cir., 1998).

 

[fidelity]

Volokh weighs in:

2nd Circuit upholds N.Y. and Conn. arms bans; contradicts Heller and McDonald
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...d-conn-arms-bans-contradicts-heller-mcdonald/

Thanks for the link. It's David Kopel writing in Volokh's space this time - and he does a good job at pointing out the contradictory and specious reasoning the court employed to rationalize the decision.

 

[fightinbluhen51]

Thanks for the link. It's David Kopel writing in Volokh's space this time - and he does a good job at pointing out the contradictory and specious reasoning the court employed to rationalize the decision.

David Kopel is a bad ass; just like Gura & Hallbrook.

When it comes to civil rights insight, history, and the study thereof, both of them are friggin' awesome.

 

[rlc2]

More commentary at Instapundit:

here:

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/217001/#respond

"This is an unfortunate area for judicial lawlessness; it will not go unnoted, and it will undermine the position of the courts." - Prof. Reynolds

 

[Southwest Chuck]

Kopel's on a Roll ... Bring on the Fire and Brimstone !

Another follow-up Article by David Kopel ... in WP's The Volokh Conspiracy

The 2nd Circuit’s second-class Second Amendment intermediate scrutiny

Boy, he really blasts the 2nd Circuit in this article, and rightly so.

"By creating a feeble version of intermediate scrutiny for the Second Amendment, the 2nd Circuit chose to ignore the Supreme Court’s teaching in in McDonald v. Chicago that the Second Amendment is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.”

 

[fidelity]

Great follow up - the dude's on fire. I'm glad that he's getting space at the Washington Post as SC Justices are likely to come across his scathing analysis of the 2nd Circuit's contrived analysis and acting as a rubber stamping arm of the executive vs an independent protector of the Constitution and the people.

 

[Bob A]

Great follow up - the dude's on fire. I'm glad that he's getting space at the Washington Post as SC Justices are likely to come across his scathing analysis of the 2nd Circuit's contrived analysis and acting as a rubber stamping arm of the executive vs an independent protector of the Constitution and the people.

Nice thought, but the (individual) decisions have already been made. We merely have to wait for the trial.

 

[press1280]

Looks like an appeal to SCOTUS is forthcoming: http://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docketfiles/15a646.htm

Decent timing too with the Kolbe opinion just being released.

 

[Kharn]

Looks like an appeal to SCOTUS is forthcoming: http://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docketfiles/15a646.htm

Decent timing too with the Kolbe opinion just being released.

I bet they have to rewrite their entire brief now.

 

[press1280]

I bet they have to rewrite their entire brief now.

Perhaps they have a separate questions for level of scrutiny and another for the law itself, allowing SCOTUS to look at the scrutiny issue, and nothing else. If they were to rule strict scrutiny, it would have to put almost all of our previous losses in doubt, would it not?

 

[pcfixer]

Looks like an appeal to SCOTUS is forthcoming: http://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docketfiles/15a646.htm

Decent timing too with the Kolbe opinion just being released.

I have been wondering when the appeal at SC would be. Now pray we
get 5 on our side to take this.

And I hope someone picks up on Kolbe too.

 

[rockstarr]

im glad they aren't giving up but im not so sure the court will take this case...

 

[press1280]

Appeal has been dropped due to Scalia's untimely death:https://www.nysrpa.org/not-seeking-cert-in-nysrpa-case/

I don't blame them one bit. No word on if the CT case will continue or not.

 

[swinokur]

sad on so many levels.

RIP Nino.