NYC CCW case is at SCOTUS!

[Allen65]

Why are they fighting back so hard now? Well partly because in the last 6 years, the divide in the country has become much more sharply divided. The fights between the Liberals and Conservatives are Getting bigger, more fierce and longer.

It's also an election year, and there is big donor $ at stake on the Dem side if they're not seen as fighting Bruen tooth and nail.

But I want to warn everyone in advance. They have already hired teams of people to research history for every single state, town city, county and federal laws, rules, regulations for anything that will help them win when it comes to using THT.

I don't think this will serve them well and will just waste the antis' resources. Thomas was clear that he and the other THT conservatives understood there were many one-off, local regulations over the 250+ years of American firearms ownership. THT looks at the larger cultural and legal context, i.e. was there a longstanding trend across multiple, disparate jurisdictions showing a common regulatory thread. And that thread just doesn't exist for much of the regulation the antis are pushing. Lower courts will have problems applying THT as intended, but that problem will decrease over time as more specific issue cases are tried and appealed.

IMHO, I also believe Thomas as well as several other Justices knew that some of these states would be fighting back, and knew they would soon be getting more cases filed on behalf of the 2A. I think they are prepared, and are ready to grant more Certs when the time comes.

I think he understood they'd fight back, but not in the way NY is. NY is going the outright defiance route, like southern states in the late 19th century and during the Civil Rights era. NY isn't doing passive-aggressive, they're charging a tank with a spear, screaming at the top of their lungs.

 

[teratos]

I think he understood they'd fight back, but not in the way NY is. NY is going the outright defiance route, like southern states in the late 19th century and during the Civil Rights era.

I think he knew. They are true believers.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

To everyone who thinks we are loosing. We are NOT!

If you really thought Bruen case would be the one that ends the fight for a while. You were wrong. It isn’t, nor was it ever going to be.

This is the start of long battle. Yet the tides have really turned in our favor now. More so then Heller.

This opinion not only strengthened Heller and McDonald, it also became a strong opinion in its own right as well.

SCOTUS isn’t stupid, they know more 2A cases will easily be filed for a pet for cert before the next term even begins in October this year. They will be accepting many more cases. IMHO, 99.9% of those will probably end up being GVR cases. If any GVR case makes it back to them, then they will issue a GVR with mandate.

I foresee maybe one possibly two more 2A cases being granted for oral argument. I am 99.9% sure we will get another oral argument granted next year on a 2A case. Although that oral argument might not happen till the 2023 term.

Take the time to go look, we have had quite a few NEW cases filed on or after June 23rd. Even more filed on June 30th when the 4 cases were GVR’d.

Do NOT believe for one second that even more cases will be filed, do not believe for one second that the laws in NY won’t be challenged, or the CA laws.

The new federal law? The case will be filed soon. It just takes time to write up an opening brief for a new case. Research needs to be done. It will be filed. Just be patient. They also have to find the right litigants, I. The best district/circuit that will give them the best chance to win at all levels. The 9th circuit, or the First through the Fourth circuit might not be their best chance. The other thing to note, is they will choose at least two or more Circuits to file in as well. If they get a circuit split it will only help our cause even more. Look at the Bump stock cases. Those were filed in at least 4 different circuits.

We will also for once start winning some injunctions as well. Maybe not in every district or circuit, but many we will.

Patience Grasshoppers… The courts sadly work slowly… however we are not poised for many great wins. (In the courts)

 

[Doctor_M]

It’s not so much faith in the system. I have no faith in the system. I don’t know that it will go smoothly, but I don’t see our side losing. We may need to flex a little. I hope the left is smart enough to understand what exactly that means.

It would be nice to avoid any unpleasantness... but we may be past that point. We shall see, I guess. Keep your powder dry.

 

[E.Shell]

I pray you are right... but I fear you are mistaken, my friend. My faith in the system is not as strong as it used to be.

Aye, I'm playing along like this might be resolved in my lifetime and applied for my MD HGP Monday. I have watched it go from the only gun law affecting me* being a verbal background check consisting of "Does your mother know you're getting this?" to where we are today and I am not especially optimistic.

*Obviously discounting the Travesty of 1934.

 

[teratos]

It would be nice to avoid any unpleasantness... but we may be past that point. We shall see, I guess. Keep your powder dry.

Sadly, I’ve been doing so. Especially after the last couple of years.

I don’t want unpleasantness. Like all of us, I want to live in peace.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

It's also an election year, and there is big donor $ at stake on the Dem side if they're not seen as fighting Bruen tooth and nail.

I don't think this will serve them well and will just waste the antis' resources. Thomas was clear that he and the other THT conservatives understood there were many one-off, local regulations over the 250+ years of American firearms ownership. THT looks at the larger cultural and legal context, i.e. was there a longstanding trend across multiple, disparate jurisdictions showing a common regulatory thread. And that thread just doesn't exist for much of the regulation the antis are pushing. Lower courts will have problems applying THT as intended, but that problem will decrease over time as more specific issue cases are tried and appealed.

I think he understood they'd fight back, but not in the way NY is. NY is going the outright defiance route, like southern states in the late 19th century and during the Civil Rights era. NY isn't doing passive-aggressive, they're charging a tank with a spear, screaming at the top of their lungs.

I agree with you 110%.

While I am from the south, they were always loosing a fighting battle. They were never smart enough to realize it. They still lost in the end. They tried fighting the cival rights in the 60’s too and lost again.

Like I said. This is just the start of the bigger battle. SCOTUS is prepared. While I may not like Trump for many other reasons. One thing he did for us the most, is give us the final call to everything with a super majority in SCOTUS

 

[Texasgrillchef]

Everyone has been in fact applying to all these May Issue states in droves.

I still think they are going to be hard pressed, if they start denying all these applications in the thousands, and find that their appeals process gets bogged down In The thousands, and cases start get filed in federal courts in the thousands.

If they think good moral character is enough they will start thinking twice when they start loosing appeals left and right.

The big trick is to get your application submitted BEFORE any of the new laws take effect.

 

[teratos]

Everyone has been in fact applying to all these May Issue states in droves.

I still think they are going to be hard pressed, if they start denying all these applications in the thousands, and find that their appeals process gets bogged down In The thousands, and cases start get filed in federal courts in the thousands.

If they think good moral character is enough they will start thinking twice when they start loosing appeals left and right.

The big trick is to get your application submitted BEFORE any of the new laws take effect.

It’s the government’s burden to prove you are a mental defective or felon, the two historical prohibitions we are very likely to be stuck with. Those require a day in Court. If your record is clear, nothing else matters. It’s a civil right.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

View attachment 371276


That's a great point. Notice how back in the 1980s/early 1990s many states were "No Issue". Alabama prohibited carrying on property not owned by the gun owner until about 1990, and Texas didn't go "shall issue" until 1995. No doubt, liberal judges will view the No issue/May issue schemes as in line with text, history, and tradition. Now, I know people will say "but but what about the time of our founding or post reconstruction" the issue with that is that liberal judges don't like guns and will continue to rule accordingly.

That’s exactly part of my point. But we also have to look at when did all these states finally pass laws that put us into a no issue, status as well.
Then we can also point out that since 1980 our tradition is now pointing to a more 2A friendly status with 25 states now CC, and at least 5-6 inline for becoming CC in the next year or two, maybe 3.

It will all depend on which courts which circuits, some of the liberal judges are wimps and will follow SCOTUS ruling. Some will be defiant though. However, if they are, they will have to be able to write a well written opinion that supports their finding. Thankfully though I still thin SCOTUS is prepared. They will issue more GVR’s if they have too, along with mandates if needed.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

It’s the government’s burden to prove you are a mental defective or felon, the two historical prohibitions we are very likely to be stuck with. Those require a day in Court. If your record is clear, nothing else matters. It’s a civil right.

They are trying to fall back on using “Good moral character“ however that’s a Non-Objective requirement clearly not allowed in the Bruen opinion.

If that’s the reason they used. At least in federal court the State will have difficulty.

Any other objective reason, such as mental, or criminal, or lack of training etc… if you don’t meet those. Nothing will help you get one.

 

[win296]

Regardless of how the SCOTUS ruling went we were winning in the long term.

Gun control can only work long term if government is competent and has the trust of the people. The government has gone out of its way in the last several years to lose trust.

Ask a teenager what they think of government or police.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Inigoes]

It’s interesting, because they didn’t fight McDonald and Heller so fiercely back then, neither did really anyone else.

They did put pressure on D.C. when they lost the Wrenn case not to file a pet for cert back then for fear that what happens with NYSPRA would have happened back then. If they had, they might have had a semi win, as SCOTUS back then might have denied cert.

However, the writing was on the wall. NYSPRA case was one bound to happen somewhere eventually. Especially after we finally got a Super Majority in SCOTUS.

What they failed to realize is that the NYSPRA v NYC that they mooted, just pissed SCOTUS off for mooting the case. That is ONE of the main reasons (not the only one though) that SCOTUS chose to accept cert on NYSPRA v Bruen case instead of one of the other carry cases.

Why are they fighting back so hard now? Well partly because in the last 6 years, the divide in the country has become much more sharply divided. The fights between the Liberals and Conservatives are Getting bigger, more fierce and longer.

As long as we maintain the 6 super majority. We will continue to win.

I knew this would not be the end of it. I knew they would fight back and whine etc…

This will take a few more cases reaching the Supreme Court. It will take them issuing a few more opinions, AND/OR GVR Cases along with mandates.

If the courts on the 4 GVR’d cases don’t correctly resolve those cases. Then those cases will absolutely get a pet for cert to SCOTUS again, And SCOTUS will again GVR them again but with a mandate.

For sake of statistics. In every single GVR case I have found, where a lower court did NOT for the second time make a proper finding, SCOTUS issued another GVR on that case, but the second time around they did so with a mandate.

Now that we have a new standard to work with on 2A cases, it’s going to be a lot harder for them to win.

But I want to warn everyone in advance. They have already hired teams of people to research history for every single state, town city, county and federal laws, rules, regulations for anything that will help them win when it comes to using THT.

We need to be just as vigilant as they are, in doing our research as well.

I don’t know about you, but I have already started.

THANKFULLY, Thomas is very skilled and knowledgeable about history as well, and his staff is as well too.

IMHO, I also believe Thomas as well as several other Justices knew that some of these states would be fighting back, and knew they would soon be getting more cases filed on behalf of the 2A. I think they are prepared, and are ready to grant more Certs when the time comes.

Maryland did and that is how the handgun qualification license cam into effect for people wanting to purchase handguns.

Then came the Maryland assault weapons ban.

Maryland loves to take away your rights, while grabbing all of your tax money and more.

 

[teratos]

Ask a teenager what they think of government or police.

My kids are respectful, but not trusting. 18&20.
My daughter got pulled over in my car for a very odd license plate issue. She “wouldn’t answer questions” until she spoke with me. Good girl.

 

[Blacksmith101]

I think Thomas, knowing history as well as he does, is pissed about the historical deprivation of rights to blacks in particular. The 2A is one of the more egregious examples of a right blacks were routinely deprived of. I’m not sure it’s necessarily only the race aspect, but the idea that the government will try to deprive any group of people they deem second class citizens of an enumerated right. The republic only functions well, and the government stays in check, when all citizens can exercise their rights freely and as intended.

That’s my take.

Justice Thomas did manage to work the Dred Scott v. Sandford decision and Chief Justice Taney into the opinion in support of Thomas's position. People need to read the whole opinion including foot notes. I have read it and believe I need to read it again to begin to appreciate what it contains. Probably need to reread it every time a state tries to pull the shenanigans New York is trying.

 

[teratos]

Justice Thomas did manage to work the Dred Scott v. Sandford decision and Chief Justice Taney into the opinion in support of Thomas's position. People need to read the whole opinion including foot notes. I have read it and believe I need to read it again to begin to appreciate what it contains. Probably need to reread it every time a state tries to pull the shenanigans New York is trying.

Yeah. I read it twice. I still need to read it again. The foot notes are at least as great as the opinion.

 

[dblas]

I think we need to look at NY/MD/NJ trying all of this fuckery as a positive thing…they are playing defense because since about 2004, this country has really expanded gun rights.

Half the country is Constitutional Carry with more states already in line. No Federal AWB and there never will be unless major fuckery is afoot.

These very few Leftist states are on the defensive, this is a good thing

If I understand a lawsuit being GVR'd by SCOTUS, Maryland's AWB has technically been ruled Unconstitutional by SCOTUS and sent back to the 4th Circuit to be rewritten accordingly due to Bruen. So it would have to be some very extreme fuckery to even pass.

 

[dblas]

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.

I'm not sure Bianchi can be mooted since it has been GVR'd.
Basically Granted Cert by SCOTUS, ruled Unconstitutional and the previous ruling Vacated, and Returned for the lower court to rewrite the opinion accordingly, with National implications.

 

[Allen65]

If I understand a lawsuit being GVR'd by SCOTUS, Maryland's AWB has technically been ruled Unconstitutional by SCOTUS and sent back to the 4th Circuit to be rewritten accordingly due to Bruen. So it would have to be some very extreme fuckery to even pass.

That's why several of us here think MGA may do a special session to moot Call, Bianchi, and the new MSI case by removing the offending language from the Public Safety Article, but adding new requirements that will make ownership of semiautomatics and any sort of outside the home carry onerous and legally hazardous, and which will require new cases seeking relief that start from scratch. The effort may ultimately fail, but from the anti's POV it gives them some breathing room to get past the election and devise a long-term strategy.

 

[Allen65]

I'm not sure Bianchi can be mooted since it has been GVR'd.
Basically Granted Cert by SCOTUS, ruled Unconstitutional and the previous ruling Vacated, and Returned for the lower court to rewrite the opinion accordingly, with National implications.

If MGA removed the sections of the statute that relief was sought for, wouldn't that moot the case? There wouldn't be an issue for the court other than 1988 fees. I don't remember the complaint in Bianchi asking for damages for past injury.