NYC CCW case is at SCOTUS!
- Thread starter press1280
- 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:
pcfixer
Ultimate Member
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Corlett
No date as of today for Argument. Question? What is "Jul 13 2021 Joint appendix filed?"
The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is further extended to and including September 14, 2021.
Most likely a November oral argument. Octobers are already listed.
jcutonilli
Ultimate Member
- Mar 28, 2013
- 2,474
It is still a little early to set the Nov oral argument schedule, maybe Fri or next week.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_appendix
Kharn
Ultimate Member
The court could flip the script and say that 2A rights can never be predicated on a permit, thus NY both requiring permits and denying permits violated the plaintiffs' 2A rights.
Dred Scott said if blacks were citizens, they could keep and carry arms wherever they went. Let the left stew on that one all summer.
That would be great but again someone would have to actually ask the court to do this, and since they haven't the court would have to steer arguments in that direction.
It seems a lot of lawyers don't like quoting Dred Scott for the obvious reason, but my observation is some judges allow the truth out more so in dicta but make political decisions when it comes to actual holdings. The Dred Scott decision with that passage is one example. Another is RBG's quote about the 2A in a pre-Heller case (bear meaning wear or carry in the pocket,exc.). She was spot on there, but when it comes to actually backing up her quote where it matters she does a 180 and tries to render the 2A a dead letter.
pcfixer
Ultimate Member
There are 13 states that do not require a permit to carry concealed. They are Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Vermont, Wyoming, and West Virginia.
I'm not sure if this case as listed would proposed NO PERMIT required in arguments.
Kharn
Ultimate Member
NYSRPA cited Scott in their merits brief this month.
"Just one year later, Chief Justice Taney invoked the prospect of newly liberated slaves exercising their right “to keep and carry arms wherever they went” in his infamous opinion in Dred Scott v. Sandford,"
Concur
Let's get the 2A recognized outside of our door steps first. Caetano did that, but it has all but been ignored!
The SCOTUS isn't going to make that giant leap to constitutional carry in any of the cases presented so far.
And off one’s premises! How can anyone think the founders limited the 2A to one’s abode? What a fiasco!
jcutonilli
Ultimate Member
- Mar 28, 2013
- 2,474
Caetano did not recognize the 2A outside our door. Caetano found that the three reasons listed by MA court were not valid. (Stun guns were not in common use at the enactment of 2A, they were dangerous and unusual because they are a modern invention, and were not readily adaptable for military use). SCOTUS vacated and remanded for proper justification and MA dropped the case.
Kharn
Ultimate Member
The MA Supreme Judicial Court tried to distinguish Caetano from Heller based on her being arrested at a grocery store, and homeless:
The Supreme Court completely disregarded the location of her arrest and weight placed on it by the lower court.
The Supreme Court completely disregarded the location of her arrest and weight placed on it by the lower court.
Your argument has proven my point.
Today, for anyone to recognize a fundemental right, people are wanting the SCOTUS to come out and say what they want hear. That's why we had to have McDonald from Heller and will have NYSRPA (possibly Young) from Caetano.
I agree with this. Since there was a total ban on stun guns, everything else (being outside her home) becomes irrelevant. The court's opinion focused on the possession, not her location.
Woodnickel
Active Member
20 permitless carry states per www.handgunlaw.us.
Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Montana, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, Wyoming.
North Dakota is permitless carry for residents only.
21 when Texas becomes permitless carry for residents and nonresidents on Sept 1st.
Bob Lee $wagger
Roll Tide
Listed for Oral Arguments on Wednesday November 3rd.
20-843 New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. V. Bruen
___________________________________________
I’m just a peckerwood who lives in the hills with too many guns.
20-843 New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. V. Bruen
___________________________________________
I’m just a peckerwood who lives in the hills with too many guns.
Kharn
Ultimate Member
Shouldn't be too cold to overnight it, but you might need to be there for 2 days.
krucam
Ultimate Member
For the McDonald hearing in 2010 I tried and failed to get in. Trains don't start running till 5 or 6am which is too late if commuting in. About 50 general seats are available, you need to be one of the 1st 50 in the line.
The successful participants had "paid" line standers. No idea what it will cost to bribe a friend to sleep on the sidewalk in a sleeping bag or lawn chair over night. In this scenario, the person going in and paying the line stander arrived around 7am in a car, pulled up to the curb with flashers on, got out, the line stander packed their bags/chairs and drove off in the car.
Well choreographed....
wjackcooper
Active Member
- Feb 9, 2011
- 689
Caetano
Clement points out:
“This Court’s opinion in Caetano v. Massachusetts likewise makes sense only on the understanding that the Second Amendment is not a homebound right. 577 U.S. 411 (2016) (per curiam). There, the Court vacated a decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court affirming the conviction of a woman found outside her home in possession of a stun gun that she obtained to defend herself from an abusive exboyfriend, concluding that the state court failed to follow this Court’s precedent in determining whether a stun gun is a protected arm. Id. at 411-412; id. at 412-13 (Alito, J., concurring). That vacatur would have sent the Supreme Judicial Court on a fool’s errand if the Second Amendment does not protect the right to possess arms outside the home in the first place.”*
Yep.
Regards
Jack
*https://www.supremecourt.gov/Docket....13 FINAL NYSRPA v. Corlett Opening Brief.pdf
Page 38 and 39
Clement points out:
“This Court’s opinion in Caetano v. Massachusetts likewise makes sense only on the understanding that the Second Amendment is not a homebound right. 577 U.S. 411 (2016) (per curiam). There, the Court vacated a decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court affirming the conviction of a woman found outside her home in possession of a stun gun that she obtained to defend herself from an abusive exboyfriend, concluding that the state court failed to follow this Court’s precedent in determining whether a stun gun is a protected arm. Id. at 411-412; id. at 412-13 (Alito, J., concurring). That vacatur would have sent the Supreme Judicial Court on a fool’s errand if the Second Amendment does not protect the right to possess arms outside the home in the first place.”*
Yep.
Regards
Jack
*https://www.supremecourt.gov/Docket....13 FINAL NYSRPA v. Corlett Opening Brief.pdf
Page 38 and 39
jcutonilli
Ultimate Member
- Mar 28, 2013
- 2,474
Yet another poor argument made by Clement in this case. He also failed to directly answer the narrowed question accepted by the court.
Courts generally don't answer questions that were not raised. If anyone thought that the applicability of the 2A outside the home was an issue, they should have been raised. This issue was not raise so it is not relevant to the SCOTUS decision in Caetano.
