SAF sues NYC over Bruen delays

[DC-W]

Permitless carry will probably never be gotten through litigation.

 

[teratos]

Permitless carry will probably never be gotten through litigation.

If States like NY and MD continue behaving the way they do…that’s what they’ll get.

 

[beetles]

Honestly what will happen to them if they refuse? Who's going to force them? The current resident of the White House and his minions certainly will not. I really expect NY and MD to flip the bird to the court and continue to arrest people for breaking what is now an unconstitutional law.

The New York government executives and senior police officers may be sued in federal court in a 1983 action. The Bruen ruling would be relevant in any proceeding based on this re-written New York law. The White House may not publicly become involved but may privately pressure New York to comply with the Supreme Court ruling, not because they agree with it, but because of the political ramifications of appearing to collude in contempt of the Supreme Court would be a political problem in November and 2024.

I expect Gov. Ron DeSantis will file for the Republican primary and will be a significant contender, regardless what Donald Trump does. You can be sure he would use this against the Democrats.

 

[pcfixer]

The AG decision is arbitrary, it means that the decision was not based on reasonable judgment.

Frosh must act as the “People’s Lawyer” for the citizens. That means us too even thou we are in the minority.
We must as MSI demand the Right to equal protection of the law without discrimination.
That's NOW and not 240 days. .. A right delayed is a right denied.

 

[lazarus]

Or, and. I'm just spitballing here, the left could actually just pass a federal law or constitutional amendment allowing abortion. You know, actually "stand up for women's rights" instead of just talking about. it for the last 50 years.

Problem is not 100% are pro choice and they’ve had control over house and senate and presidency for about 8 months out of the last 50 years. Republicans would never let a pro choice law get passed, let alone a constitutional amendment.

They need 60 seats in the senate or it isn’t happening.

 

[lazarus]

We agree, unfortunately it’s not what SCOTUS gave us.

It would have to be an amendment.

Not necessarily. Commerce clause. Most medical procedures involve interstate commerce in some way even if the procedure itself is done within a state by two residents of the same state.

Otherwise the civil rights act and Americans with disabilities act wouldn’t have stood up. Now, I am sure there are those itching to have SCOTUS throw both of those out too.

 

[Crazytrain]

Not necessarily. Commerce clause. Most medical procedures involve interstate commerce in some way even if the procedure itself is done within a state by two residents of the same state.

Otherwise the civil rights act and Americans with disabilities act wouldn’t have stood up. Now, I am sure there are those itching to have SCOTUS throw both of those out too.

The Commerce Clause is probably the second most abused clause of the Constitution, going far beyond what was intended. The most abused is the so called General Welfare clause, which is part of the preamble and doesn't directly impart powers to the government at all. Both are used to justify the feds doing and regulation anything and everything the Constitution otherwise doesn't explicitly permit. If we ever get judicial clarity on these two perhaps we truly can get liberty back.

Like everything involving the government, I'm not holding my breath.

 

[teratos]

The commerce clause can regulate fetal parts.

We are talking about people.

 

[TheBert]

Or, and. I'm just spitballing here, the left could actually just pass a federal law or constitutional amendment allowing abortion. You know, actually "stand up for women's rights" instead of just talking about. it for the last 50 years.

The Demoncrats would forever be known as the baby killer party if either route was taken.

Having the supreme court opinion that allowed abortion gave them the ability to point at them as the enablers of baby killing.

 

[Muleskinner]

We agree, unfortunately it’s not what SCOTUS gave us.

It would have to be an amendment.

It would have to be a constitutional amendment. The supreme Court has already stated that there's no federal protection for legalized abortion. They sent it back to the States because that's where it belongs. The federal government has no jurisdiction anymore. Good luck with trying to pass a constitutional amendment.

 

[Muleskinner]

The New York government executives and senior police officers may be sued in federal court in a 1983 action. The Bruen ruling would be relevant in any proceeding based on this re-written New York law. The White House may not publicly become involved but may privately pressure New York to comply with the Supreme Court ruling, not because they agree with it, but because of the political ramifications of appearing to collude in contempt of the Supreme Court would be a political problem in November and 2024.

I expect Gov. Ron DeSantis will file for the Republican primary and will be a significant contender, regardless what Donald Trump does. You can be sure he would use this against the Democrats.

Well first off the offended party would have to have the financial ability to fight in federal court and then a federal court is going to have to decide with them. It may eventually find its way in front of the supreme Court several hundred thousand dollars and a few years from now. I believe you're seeing the seeds of a dictatorship soon. When States refuse to abide by a ruling from the supreme Court the United States of America and the party in power refuses to enforce the supreme Court rolling that is tyranny. That's what our founding fathers warned us against and that's why they gave us the second amendment. Unfortunately there's really nobody willing to use it for the reason it was written. So we just suck it up.

 

[BeoBill]

The AG decision is arbitrary, it means that the decision was not based on reasonable judgment.

Frosh must act as the “People’s Lawyer” for the citizens. That means us too even thou we are in the minority.
We must as MSI demand the Right to equal protection of the law without discrimination.
That's NOW and not 240 days. .. A right delayed is a right denied.

Define "unreasonable" as in "unreasonable delay"...

 

[lazarus]

Well first off the offended party would have to have the financial ability to fight in federal court and then a federal court is going to have to decide with them. It may eventually find its way in front of the supreme Court several hundred thousand dollars and a few years from now. I believe you're seeing the seeds of a dictatorship soon. When States refuse to abide by a ruling from the supreme Court the United States of America and the party in power refuses to enforce the supreme Court rolling that is tyranny. That's what our founding fathers warned us against and that's why they gave us the second amendment. Unfortunately there's really nobody willing to use it for the reason it was written. So we just suck it up.

That right there is a constitutional crisis, and they tend to go sideways and pear shaped very fast.

 

[Melnic]

Just because they can’t convict you does not mean they can’t make it painful for you
I have zero faith in the left run justice system at the state and lower fed level right now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BurkeM]

When do these gov officials lose their immunity from being sued personally?

Never.

Frosh is fighting hard to defend Qualified Immunity in the Hurlbert case.

In the alternative, federal law allows individuals to file civil rights lawsuits under section 1983.

A Civil Rights Lawsuit Explained for the Layperson — First Defense Legal Aid

By Charles Jones, FDLA Enforce Your Rights Paralegal While explanations from lawyers can be informative, they can also be a bit confusing. Here, I’ll explain a civil rights lawsuit from the voice of a layperson. I work with the Civil Rights Legal Aid Program (CRLAP) here at First Defense Legal Aid,

www.first-defense.org

 

[BeoBill]

 

[fabsroman]

The court can order them to stop enforcing it and/or deem their permitting scheme unenforceable and order them to issue permits. If they refuse the court can effective invalidate the law/regulation entirely.

At that point, its constitutional carry. Good luck on NYC attempting to arrest people for carrying when the judicial system says what citizens are doing is legal. Yeah, the city/state could decide not to abide by court orders. Then it gets the feds involved. And they probably would, even as much as I dislike Biden. He is the type to "vehemently disagree, but still follow the courts instructions".

Is the Democrats lose the House and the Senate in the midterms and Biden decides to give the bird to SCOTUS, he might very well find himself impeached.

 

[Inigoes]

Is the Democrats lose the House and the Senate in the midterms and Biden decides to give the bird to SCOTUS, he might very well find himself impeached.

Being impeached is a badge of honor these days.

 

[motorcoachdoug]

If Slow Jo is impeached do we really want on her back Harris as POTUS? or worse yet ol bitty Nancy ???

 

[teratos]

Is the Democrats lose the House and the Senate in the midterms and Biden decides to give the bird to SCOTUS, he might very well find himself impeached.

25th Amendment. Have Joe take a mental status exam on live TV. He’d fail miserably.