Supreme Court Takes Major NRA Second Amendment Case from New York

Mike OTDP said:

I think that Thomas wants, very much, to write a definitive 2A decision. He knows that the opinion that Scalia will be remembered for is Heller. Beside that, everything else is trivial. And Thomas will cheerfully take on the task of writing the decision that builds on the foundations laid down in Heller, because it will be studied for the next century.

Click to expand...

This. Very much this.

Additionally, J. Thomas has been a staunch 2A guy for decades, longer than anybody else currently on the Court. As a matter of simple comity it would be a pure shame if the writing of the NYSR&PC decision were denied him.

In any event, the decision will have to respect the opinions (reciprocal comity) of the other majority signers, so even if J. Thomas is indeed given the writing, the result will certainly be less than he and, probably, most of us would wish.

I just heard a rumor that RBG was diagnosed with an unknown virus .... and the virus died. ?


Too early to joke about this, sorry.

Alright, kicking this thread again to ask this question: seeing as how it is very unlikely this case shall be ruled moot at this point, at what time should we expect the voted results and opinions from the court?

Cruacious said:

Alright, kicking this thread again to ask this question: seeing as how it is very unlikely this case shall be ruled moot at this point, at what time should we expect the voted results and opinions from the court?

Click to expand...

Not to be glib, but whenever they want to finalize and post. There is no timeline other than tradition of them posting most opinions by the end of the term in June.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

The more I've been reading about SCOTUS, the more it seems historic decisions or otherwise tough decisions are announced in June at the very end of term.

MJD438 said:

Not to be glib, but whenever they want to finalize and post. There is no timeline other than tradition of them posting most opinions by the end of the term in June.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Thanks, didn't expect that they could stretch it beyond a single term (which seeing as there is no restriction on this, it makes sense). Honestly, I will pray that tradition holds and their opinion is published in June.

Cruacious said:

Thanks, didn't expect that they could stretch it beyond a single term (which seeing as there is no restriction on this, it makes sense). Honestly, I will pray that tradition holds and their opinion is published in June.

Click to expand...

Add to that prayer... that their decision is IN OUR FAVOR... as in keeping with the original intention of the 2A writers.

Goddammit.

MigraineMan said:

Goddammit.

Click to expand...

Worse than the RBG pneumonia thread?

press1280 said:

I thought that a justice is picked by Roberts in a random fashion to pen the opinion and dissent. Others can write a concurrence if they feel more strongly or see it slightly differently.

Click to expand...

Kharn said:

The CJ picks for the majority or the dissent, whichever he is on, but it isn't random. The goal is to spread the majority opinion load evenly each month, thankfully half the cases on the merits docket are 9-0 or 8-1 slam dunks so it is usually easy to get close to the desired outcome.

Click to expand...

As the new 'swing' justice, Roberts is even more likely to control opinion assignments because he'll almost always be in the majority. Also, I don't think opinion assignment is entirely about leveling the workload. It's also a matter of assigning the opinion to the justice who can write an opinion that the others will sign on to. You may have five or more justices voting one way on a petition, but that doesn't mean they all have the same opinion about how to get there. Moreover, I suspect Roberts is capable of stacking the deck when he sides with the court's liberal justices. Vote with them and assign the opinion to the justice who will write the narrowest, least impactful opinion. He may only be one vote in nine, but controlling the opinions from the ideological center gives him tremendous power.

Mike OTDP said:

I think that Thomas wants, very much, to write a definitive 2A decision. He knows that the opinion that Scalia will be remembered for is Heller. Beside that, everything else is trivial. And Thomas will cheerfully take on the task of writing the decision that builds on the foundations laid down in Heller, because it will be studied for the next century.

Click to expand...

Fedora said:

This. Very much this.

Additionally, J. Thomas has been a staunch 2A guy for decades, longer than anybody else currently on the Court. As a matter of simple comity it would be a pure shame if the writing of the NYSR&PC decision were denied him.

In any event, the decision will have to respect the opinions (reciprocal comity) of the other majority signers, so even if J. Thomas is indeed given the writing, the result will certainly be less than he and, probably, most of us would wish.

Click to expand...

I'm sure Thomas would like to write the next major Second Amendment opinion, but I'd be surprised if he does. The only way that will happen is if Roberts is in dissent.

Thomas doesn't write a lot of important majority opinions. He writes for himself a lot, either in concurrence or in dissent. While he may be in the majority in a lot of cases, he's not very good at getting the other justices to go along with his view of the world. I actually don't think Thomas will be remembered as a great justice or even an above average one, he's not.

Great justices are influential and persuasive. They craft opinions that bring in votes from the other justices. Kennedy and Warren are great modern examples. Thomas is not. A great justice does not stand alone as much as Thomas does. You're not a great justice for voting in the majority most of the time, but still end up writing for yourself. That simply means you are out of step with your brethren. The Supreme Court is a institution of consensus. iconoclasts don'e wield influence or results.

While Thomas is 100% on-point with the Second Amendment, he's way out there, frighteningly so on many issues. He wrote a really moving and historically accurate concurring opinion in McDonald, but he utterly failed to get a single other justice to sign on to it - not even Scalia. That speaks volumes.

Knuckle Dragger said:

As the new 'swing' justice, Roberts is even more likely to control opinion assignments because he'll almost always be in the majority. Also, I don't think opinion assignment is entirely about leveling the workload. It's also a matter of assigning the opinion to the justice who can write an opinion that the others will sign on to. You may have five or more justices voting one way on a petition, but that doesn't mean they all have the same opinion about how to get there. Moreover, I suspect Roberts is capable of stacking the deck when he sides with the court's liberal justices. Vote with them and assign the opinion to the justice who will write the narrowest, least impactful opinion. He may only be one vote in nine, but controlling the opinions from the ideological center gives him tremendous power.



I'm sure Thomas would like to write the next major Second Amendment opinion, but I'd be surprised if he does. The only way that will happen is if Roberts is in dissent.

Thomas doesn't write a lot of important majority opinions. He writes for himself a lot, either in concurrence or in dissent. While he may be in the majority in a lot of cases, he's not very good at getting the other justices to go along with his view of the world. I actually don't think Thomas will be remembered as a great justice or even an above average one, he's not.

Great justices are influential and persuasive. They craft opinions that bring in votes from the other justices. Kennedy and Warren are great modern examples. Thomas is not. A great justice does not stand alone as much as Thomas does. You're not a great justice for voting in the majority most of the time, but still end up writing for yourself. That simply means you are out of step with your brethren. The Supreme Court is a institution of consensus. iconoclasts don'e wield influence or results.

While Thomas is 100% on-point with the Second Amendment, he's way out there, frighteningly so on many issues. He wrote a really moving and historically accurate concurring opinion in McDonald, but he utterly failed to get a single other justice to sign on to it - not even Scalia. That speaks volumes.

Click to expand...

It's true that it speaks volumes for how much of a divide there is between Thomas and the others. But maybe it's more about how far the rest of the appointees are from the original intent of the Constitution. I'm sure there is a lesson in this but that will be left up to history to see if any is truly there.

If Trump gets one or two more S.C. appointments, the Thomas approach to the 2 A. might get adopted, we can hope so.

Regards
Jack

Knuckle Dragger said:

As the new 'swing' justice, Roberts is even more likely to control opinion assignments because he'll almost always be in the majority. Also, I don't think opinion assignment is entirely about leveling the workload. It's also a matter of assigning the opinion to the justice who can write an opinion that the others will sign on to. You may have five or more justices voting one way on a petition, but that doesn't mean they all have the same opinion about how to get there. Moreover, I suspect Roberts is capable of stacking the deck when he sides with the court's liberal justices. Vote with them and assign the opinion to the justice who will write the narrowest, least impactful opinion. He may only be one vote in nine, but controlling the opinions from the ideological center gives him tremendous power.



I'm sure Thomas would like to write the next major Second Amendment opinion, but I'd be surprised if he does. The only way that will happen is if Roberts is in dissent.

Thomas doesn't write a lot of important majority opinions. He writes for himself a lot, either in concurrence or in dissent. While he may be in the majority in a lot of cases, he's not very good at getting the other justices to go along with his view of the world. I actually don't think Thomas will be remembered as a great justice or even an above average one, he's not.

Great justices are influential and persuasive. They craft opinions that bring in votes from the other justices. Kennedy and Warren are great modern examples. Thomas is not. A great justice does not stand alone as much as Thomas does. You're not a great justice for voting in the majority most of the time, but still end up writing for yourself. That simply means you are out of step with your brethren. The Supreme Court is a institution of consensus. iconoclasts don'e wield influence or results.

While Thomas is 100% on-point with the Second Amendment, he's way out there, frighteningly so on many issues. He wrote a really moving and historically accurate concurring opinion in McDonald, but he utterly failed to get a single other justice to sign on to it - not even Scalia. That speaks volumes.

Click to expand...

Roberts has joined with the liberals and written the opinion himself as a means of damage control in the past.

Kharn said:

Roberts has joined with the liberals and written the opinion himself as a means of damage control in the past.

Click to expand...

Maybe we should all hope that he gets replaced before RBG...

Replace him with a true COTUS believer that won't think "Politics over COTUS".

RoadDawg said:

Maybe we should all hope that he gets replaced before RBG...

Replace him with a true COTUS believer that won't think "Politics over COTUS".

Click to expand...

The CJ fixing opinions has been a tactic for decades. Better a mild 6-3 than a horrible 5-4. Now that Kavanaugh is in Kenney's seat, it's a different dynamic, and he doesn't have to chase Kenney's wishy-washy swing vote.

I would far rather see Ginsburg or Sotomayor off the court than Roberts.

Trying to keep my mind busy on something other then COVID-19.

Now that the SC has suspended oral arguments for the near future, can we assume they will concentrate on getting some of the backlog cleared out? Maybe they will put the final touches on this case and release the ruling? Any chance? Beuller....





.

press release on the closure

For Immediate Release For Further Information Contact:
March 16, 2020 Kathleen Arberg (202) 479-3211
In keeping with public health precautions recommended in response to COVID-19, the Supreme Court is postponing the oral arguments currently scheduled for the March session (March 23-25 and March 30-April 1). The Court will examine the options for rescheduling those cases in due course in light of the developing circumstances.

The Court will hold its regularly scheduled Conference on Friday, March 20. Some Justices may participate remotely by telephone. The Court will issue its regularly scheduled Order List on Monday, March 23 at 9:30 a.m. The list will be posted on the Court’s Website at that time: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/ordersofthecourt/19.

The Building will continue to be open for official business, and filing deadlines are not extended under Rule 30.1. The Court is expanding remote working capabilities to reduce the number of employees in the Building, consistent with public health guidance. The Building will remain closed to the public until further notice.

The Court’s postponement of argument sessions in light of public health concerns is not unprecedented. The Court postponed scheduled arguments for October 1918 in response to the Spanish flu epidemic. The Court also shortened its argument calendars in August 1793 and August 1798 in response to yellow fever outbreaks.

Click to expand...

I like that they included the historical context.
I bet NYSRPA is still held until the end of the term. It will accelerate the boring bankruptcy, patent, and administrative law cases that are 9-0 or 8-1 and not earth shattering.

I would love for them to rule on the New York case this Monday. Thomas would most likely write the opinion, in favor of.

Well, if they don’t have oral hearings, maybe it’ll speed up other things ...

Yeah right.

delaware_export said:

Well, if they don’t have oral hearings, maybe it’ll speed up other things ...

Yeah right.

Click to expand...

I am trying to have a glass half full optimism Let's face it, if they did rule in favor on Monday, image the fun watching all those NY liberals heads explode. It would be more fun to watch than the day after the 2016 election.