New NJ and NY carry cases filed
- Thread starter wolfwood
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
So when do we expect the jersey case to be reviewed/ decided?
I am just worried about Roberts. For all we now he is going to say the justifiable need standard is a "tax"
delaware_export
Ultimate Member
- Apr 10, 2018
- 3,202
taxing the press, baptists or any religion in disfavor, people not wanting their houses searched without a warrant, people wanting to speak freely, people wanting to vote, etc... would not float.
taxing to exercise rights protected by the 2a...
but but but it's gunz! no problem.
taxing to exercise rights protected by the 2a...
but but but it's gunz! no problem.
Depends on if NJ asks for extensions. At best, maybe 2-3 months to get to conference.
CrabcakesAndFootball
Active Member
- Jun 14, 2017
- 697
"The Courts of Appeals for the District of Columbia and Ninth Circuits have concluded that the right to carry a firearm extends outside the home and that licensing restrictions that require citizens to show a special need for carrying a firearm effectively “destroy[ ] the ordinarily situated citizen’s right to bear arms” and therefore are categorically unconstitutional."
Who would have thought they would ever read that sentence? And one of those is the direct result of the efforts of MDS member wolfwood. Way to go!
Who would have thought they would ever read that sentence? And one of those is the direct result of the efforts of MDS member wolfwood. Way to go!
Pope414
Active Member
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/18-824.html
Rogers page is up on SCOTUS' website. Response from NJ due February 1st.
Rogers page is up on SCOTUS' website. Response from NJ due February 1st.
So now the wait begins to see of SCOTUS will hear the case. At least they will hear the case about MD's gerrymandering case it was announced on channel 4 news this morning.
Amici from Arizona and 22 states posted: https://www.supremecourt.gov/Docket...rief - Rogers v. Grewal_FINAL - 23 States.pdf
It's all stats on shall-issue vs. may-issue crime rates.
It's all stats on shall-issue vs. may-issue crime rates.
danb
dont be a dumbass
At this point this may not even get distributed for conference until May or June, or later (Sept).
krucam
Ultimate Member
Lots of new terminology...Objective (Shall Issue), Subjective (May or No Issue).
I wonder if Herr Frosh and his minions in the LD division of MSP will read that ?? Of course I bet if he does he will throw a mini fit saying all those states are wrong....
Biggfoot44
Ultimate Member
- Aug 2, 2009
- 33,108
No . He smuggly knows that he is Right, and all those other states are wrong .
Pope414
Active Member
I just had a horrible thought....SCOTUS took the 2A case out of NY dealing with transporting you firearm outside the state after not taking a case since Heller.... Could it be they took that case so they can say they finally took a 2A case giving them an out to not wade into the right to carry without having to prove justifiable need? Especially After justices Thomas and Gorsuch ripped the court a new one short of calling them cowards??? It seems like the NY case would effect such a small group compared to a challenge to justifiable need. Compared to Drake,Perulta and now Rogers it seems like small potatoes .....boy do I hope I am wrong
This is my fear as well.
This case isn't about carry. It's about the core right of firearms ownership and transportation between homes intrastate, to places of lawful use intrastate (ranges), and interstate transport. And it's also about whether a state can arbitrarily outlaw any aspect of firearms ownership it wants to, even when that law isn't rational.
You're thinking of the NYRPA case, this thread is the Rogers NJ carry permit thread.
Pope414
Active Member
Allen the fear is that they will sidestep Rogers using the ny gun transport case as a "see we took a 2A case" because they don't have the stones
Users who are viewing this thread
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
-
MD DNR Outdoor Recreation Survey -- Outdoorsman Responses Needed (2 Viewers)
- Started by Derwood
- Replies: 5
-
-