NYC CCW case is at SCOTUS!

[Allen65]

It really will be fun when she realizes she is squishier than the freight train a-comin...

Oh, she's pretty much guaranteed she'll be a pink stain on the front of the locomotive. And she may very well tie Frosh, Bonta, and a few others to the tracks before she's done going out in a pink mist of glory.

 

[JPG]

W

NY throws temper tantrum after losing. I envision a bigger smackdown coming soon.

https://www.governor.ny.gov/sites/d...ION1-CONCEALED_CARRY_IMPROVEMENT_ACT-BILL.pdf

Summary:

1) To get a license an in-person interview is required. Applicant needs to reveal names of everyone residing with him - spouse, children etc. Applicant needs to submit all his present and passed social media accounts. 4 character references are now a law.

2) Sensitive places - govt buildings, public parks, playgrounds, libraries, zoos, any property of any educational institution, any school or children's program, any place serving alcohol, public transportation, public transportation facilities including stations and airports, entertainment venues, any protests or political gatherings, any place not displaying signs that allow carry, Times Square, places of worship. Penalty - class E felony.

3) Central database of all licenses that will be checked monthly against arrest records, indictments, protection orders etc.

4) Database of all ammunition purchases

5) Storage in a vehicle when not in control of it (parked etc) - weapons must be unloaded and locked in a fire and impact resistant container. Lockable soft cases are not allowed anymore. Penalty - Class A misdemeanor.

6) Background checks on ammunition purchases through the State Police. Another section creates a "background check fund" to finance this.

7) 16-hr class for a pistol permit - required to be completed ONCE. If in possession of a permit already, will need to do the class prior to first renewal.

8) Includes muzzleloaders in a definition of a "rifle" and "shotgun". So background checks, FFL transfers etc for muzzleloaders. No more buying them online.

Welp guess we will finally have the “shall not be infringed” argued in court.

 

[JPG]

News from the Department of Its not Hard.

Now that’s a great Friday night document dump.

 

[Squaregrouper]

The last time a state tried this was at a school in Little Rock AR. It didn't turn out well for Arkansas.

 

[Allen65]

The last time a state tried this was at a school in Little Rock AR. It didn't turn out well for Arkansas.

But Brandon isn't nationalizing the NG to escort permit applicants in to drop off their applications.

 

[Decoy]

California prepping to BAN CCW in 99% of the state!​

CA is also adopting the no CCW at "all businesses by default" that NY adopted.

 

[lazarus]

California prepping to BAN CCW in 99% of the state!​

CA is also adopting the no CCW at "all businesses by default" that NY adopted.

Remember when the founders warned us about professional politicians…

 

[jbrown50]

Four licensed concealed carry gun owners sue D.C. for prohibition to carry on Metro​

Four licensed concealed carry gun owners sue D.C. for prohibition to carry on Metro

Four men with D. C.

wjla.com

WASHINGTON (7News) — Four men with D.C.-issued concealed carry gun permits are suing the District of Columbia for allegedly violating their Second Amendment rights by prohibiting them from carrying licensed concealed guns on D.C. Metros and buses.

In a lawsuit filed Thursday in D.C. District Court, Gregory Angelo, Tyler Yzaguirre, and Cameron Erickson of D.C. and Robert Miller of Virginia say the D.C. law prohibiting licensed gun holders from carrying covered weapons on WMATA’s public transportation system infringes upon their constitutional rights.

They are calling for the courts to issue an injunction that would prevent D.C. from enforcing the law.

“I’m sick of the government telling me where I can and cannot carry based on arbitrary, unlawful rules,” said plaintiff Tyler Yzaguirre.

Well now, that didn't take long to happen.

 

[DC-W]

Doom pill extreme https://reason.com/volokh/2022/07/01/bruen-broke-the-deal/

 

[HaveBlue]

Doom pill extreme https://reason.com/volokh/2022/07/01/bruen-broke-the-deal/

I don’t agree w/Volokh this time. “Flying under the radar” is a base survival tactic. However, It still means your carrying at the whim of someone who despises your lack of fealty. That status quo also means that only the privileged few could protect themselves.

 

[Allen65]

Doom pill extreme https://reason.com/volokh/2022/07/01/bruen-broke-the-deal/

I agree with some of his pessimism about 2CA. They worry me even more than 9th. 9CA makes bad law by lack of intellectual heft; 2CA makes it by design.

What we absolutely don't want is a quick set of adverse rulings in the 2nd that can be used persuasively as defense arguments in cases in other appellate districts. That risks poisoning the whole Bruen process until and unless SCOTUS steps in again with an even bigger hammer, hands 2CA some crayons, and tells them to shut up and color.

 

[6-Pack]

Dead due to error in judgement on either side is still no less DEAD.

Do NOT place yourself (in the general sense) into the position where there is any question in the matter.

That’s my point. The inaction from Frosh/MSP/Hogan goes beyond just being anti-gun - people may get injured/killed over this. All it takes is one “I know my rights” person and then a situation occurs where everyone loses.

I guess I could have worded my original post a little better.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

So you've got two cases that were GVR'd that involve magazine bans. What if you get a split? Can't have a split national precedent

Doubt that will happen but if you do. Odds are both sides will then file another petition for cert. In Which case SCOTUS issues the one case that was decided wrongly With another GVR this time with a Mandate.

The lower courts know this. So they don’t usually go against SCOTUS. Not to say they never have. They just usually don’t, unless they want to take any blame off them. It becomes even more an issue when like this time, two similar cases were GVR’d the same time. that of Duncan and of ANJRPC.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

Is there an estimate on when we should expect further guidance from the state?

Probably around 90 days minimum for a mandate, judgment, enjoinment.

 

[Allen65]

Probably around 90 days minimum for a mandate, judgment, enjoinment.

You'te assuming Frosh and the MGA leadership will be content standing by waiting on the tracks for the oncoming train. I think we'll have an MGA special session before that. It's what I'd do in his shoes, go on offense. But not in the recon-by-fire, WWNC way the NY Governor is.

In fact, I'd do a legal tactical withdrawl by using new legislation to moot Bianchi and the new MSI G&S case. And then I'd introduce creative new legal hazards to firearms ownership and carry not addressed by Bruen holdings or even Thomas' dicta. And then wash-rinse-repeat using taxpayer resources indefinitely in an ongoing game of injunction whack-a-mole.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

If everyone would take the time to read all the current cases pending, as well as all the new cases filed on and since June 23rd, one would see all these states temper tantrums is coming to head.

Not to mention that on a few of the cases, requests have allready been filed for stays to be lifted, Injunctions and enjoinments to be enacted. Several on immediate emergency orders as well.

Take a look at the latest motion for Miller v Bonta, filed on June 30th.
Then take a look at Rupp v Bonta.

Let the states throw all the temper tantrums they want. In 90-120 days, you will find that various states appeal process will be over flowing with appeals, as well as hundreds if not more cases filed in federal and state courts. To the point of so many, that they will eventually capitulate.

For those states that want to check social media? Well good luck. Never been on any and never will be. Never been on Facebook or anything similar. So they will be hard pressed.

Training? Well a a group of us instructors that will cover for each other.
Not to hard to do.

MD though has an exemption for Instructors, even for renewals. MD isn’t the only state that has exemptions for Instructors. Why should instructors take the same course they teach that’s crazy!

What I am saying is one of the states will push it to far and piss SCOTUS off and get a ruling they won’t like even more.

They are all idiots for thinking that challenges won’t end up back at SCOTUS. They are idiots if they really think that a conservative force of 6 justices will change their opinion anytime soon and they will win at SC level. Especially after the SC has done Bruen and Dobbs, And EPA, and many more this year.

Even a SC expert said that This year is just the beginning of the court swinging Right with many conservative opinions. It will go even more right next year.

Yes, it has been 10 years since we have had a 2A case granted cert. now since April 2021, we have had 5 2A cases granted cert. 4 GVR cases still count as a Grant!

Expect more in the near the future. That’s why I said they are idiots if they don’t think their laws will be challenged, and even bigger idiots if they think they have a chance in Hell of winning with 6 conservative Justices.

 

[RoadDawg]

That’s my point. The inaction from Frosh/MSP/Hogan goes beyond just being anti-gun - people may get injured/killed over this. All it takes is one “I know my rights” person and then a situation occurs where everyone loses.

I guess I could have worded my original post a little better.

It is Incumbent upon us to discourage rash actions from folks in our community. The left is begging for examples to point their fingers at and yell “we told you so!”
And none of us need to be the example for them.

 

[PO2012]

Are they trying to replace good cause with good moral character?

Yes, they are. What they either don't realize or don't care about is the can of worms this opens.

As a native New Yorker, I had to deal with the Sullivan Act and its related statutes for much of my life. I am quite familiar with their history. The debates in the NYS legislature at the time were saturated with racism and the transcripts of those debates still exist. The main proponents of the Sullivan Act openly stated that its purpose was to disarm Catholics, Italians and other ethnic and religious minorities. Timothy Sullivan, for whom the Sullivan Act was named, was a notorious crime lord. "Good moral character" was code for being a White, Anglo-Saxon Protestant male, preferably one with a certain amount of financial worth. SCOTUS is not going to allow this type of subjective standard.

The NYS definition of "sensitive places" isn't going to fly either. Times Square? Libraries? Public Parks? The Subway? Lol. Absolutely not. SCOTUS is going to pummel NYS for this.

 

[platoonDaddy]

Keep in mind, when writing the majority decision Justice Clarence Thomas concluded there was no historical requirement that law-abiding citizens show the kind of special need for self-defense required by the New York law to carry a gun in public. Indeed, as Thomas wrote, there is “no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need.”

The latest effort from the New York assembly is outlined in an Associated Press report which

New York State New Gun Laws Include, People applying for a gun license will have to turn over a list of their social media accounts for officials to verify their “character & conduct” - The Last Refuge

New York Governor Kathy Hochul called a special session of the state legislature after the Supreme Court knocked down their firearm restrictions. The new law, which passed both chambers of democrat-controlled government, takes effect Sept 1st and is unlikely to hold up once challenged in court...

theconservativetreehouse.com

 

[Allen65]

The new NY law isn't just unconstitutional, it's passage was a direct attack on rule of law and a rejection of the authority of the Federal judiciary. If there aren't legal consequences for those behind the passage of this law, other states may follow with similar actions against Federal laws and rulings they don't want to obey, and very quickly we're effectively no longer functioning as a country.