Supreme Court Takes Major NRA Second Amendment Case from New York

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!

    • Register Log in
    danb

    danb

    dont be a dumbass
    Feb 24, 2013
    22,704
    google is your friend, I am not.
    Occam

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,410
    Montgomery County
    danb said:
    Clement is a smart guy and worth every penny. I dont care what the internet haters and armchair lawyers here have to say. There is a reason he gets a lots of cases in front of the court, and this is one prime choice Grade A example. And I am only half way through!
    Click to expand...

    I'm sure no authority (or even much of a student), but the it-ain't-moot argument here seems pretty damn solid. I'm a little tingly at the thought of NYC (and now the state, given their engagement in the shenanigans) being smacked down on this. I realize that it may not be the 2A jackpot we'd all like, but every little bit of jurisprudential justice dished out is some oxygen we can breath. Hoping for the best on this.
     
    danb

    danb

    dont be a dumbass
    Feb 24, 2013
    22,704
    google is your friend, I am not.
    Occam said:
    I'm sure no authority (or even much of a student), but the it-ain't-moot argument here seems pretty damn solid. I'm a little tingly at the thought of NYC (and now the state, given their engagement in the shenanigans) being smacked down on this. I realize that it may not be the 2A jackpot we'd all like, but every little bit of jurisprudential justice dished out is some oxygen we can breath. Hoping for the best on this.
    Click to expand...

    The part where people can still be prosecuted or denied a permit for past actions is persuasive. Also, written permission for gunsmithing? WTF were they thinking?
     
    Occam

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,410
    Montgomery County
    danb said:
    The part where people can still be prosecuted or denied a permit for past actions is persuasive. Also, written permission for gunsmithing? WTF were they thinking?
    Click to expand...

    And: you and I are still prohibited from traveling through the city with ours. That doesn't injure the plaintiffs directly right now, but it goes to the capriciousness of the city/state's thinking on this. The city left all sorts of it-ain't-moot wiggle room here, from where I'm sitting.
     
    Occam

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,410
    Montgomery County
    Inigoes said:
    It does! Clement pointed out there are a couple NYSRPA members who live outside of the city, and can't join their friends inside the city at a designated shooting range.
    Click to expand...

    Ah! Even better, then. Thanks for that. No Mooty McMootface for you, NY.
     
    B

    Blacksmith101

    Grumpy Old Man
    Jun 22, 2012
    22,287
    Occam said:
    Ah! Even better, then. Thanks for that. No Mooty McMootface for you, NY.
    Click to expand...

    There are also some members who live on Long Island and they can't take their guns to any other state without going by boat or airplane because you can not drive from Long Island to anywhere else without passing through some part of New York City.
     
    D

    ddestruel

    Member
    Jun 23, 2015
    90
    Pope414 said:
    Ha- I have a feeling Cuomo just got his peepee slapped LOL..:lol2:
    Click to expand...

    I’ll believe that when I hear arguments and I see the ruling at the end of this. Clement is going big. But will the court be pissed and go big or will they try and still exercise restraint. I think there is a shot across the bow that the courts not gonna continue to let the circuit courts and district courts mince words but what kind of level and the rules that they lay forward are anybody’s guess. I’m not too convinced that this will be a roe versus Wade moment.... Where a majority of the lower courts all the sudden decide they want to just start ruling in a different direction but I like the rest of us on here, I am looking look at things through my own rose colored glasses and can only hope that’s the way this ends up. A new low water mark that is clearly defined Separating the law-abiding citizens as clearly protected from the rules imposed on the excluded or justifiably regulated class.
     
    Last edited:
    C

    CurlyDave

    Member
    May 29, 2015
    47
    Oregon
    ddestruel said:
    I’ll believe that when I hear arguments and I see the ruling at the end of this...
    Click to expand...

    I have to agree.

    I think the SC is in a bind. Almost nothing survives strict scrutiny, but the Circuit Courts claim to have been applying intermediate scrutiny which lead to nonsensical decisions.

    Unless they invent a new, unique to the 2A, level of scrutiny, which the Circuit Courts will soon start ignoring, the only place to go is strict. I don't think they have the votes for strict.

    More popcorn.
     
    danb

    danb

    dont be a dumbass
    Feb 24, 2013
    22,704
    google is your friend, I am not.
    ddestruel said:
    I’ll believe that when I hear arguments and I see the ruling at the end of this. Clement is going big. But will the court be pissed and go big or will they try and still exercise restraint. I think there is a shot across the bow that the courts not gonna continue to let the circuit courts and district courts mince words but what kind of level and the rules that they lay forward are anybody’s guess. I’m not too convinced that this will be a row versus Wade moment.... Where a majority of the lower courts all the sudden decide they want to just start ruling in a different direction but I like the rest of us on here, I am looking look at things through my own rose colored glasses and can only hope that’s the way this ends up. A new low water mark that is clearly defined Separating the law-abiding citizens as clearly protected from the rules imposed on the excluded or justifiably regulated class.
    Click to expand...

    I agreed with the "restraint" bit back in Feb, except that NYC has shown disrespect and borderline contempt for the court and even had a letter rejected as procedurally improper. Is there another example of a municipality or state the size of NYC ignoring Supreme Court rules, showing this level of disrespect? Submitting a letter that says that they wont submit a merits brief?

    Prior to these shenanigans I thought we would get something along the lines outlined in the US Solicitor General Amicus brief, which was pretty narrow and restrained. Now I would say all bets are off.

    Instead of making it about the 2nd amendment and transporting guns, NYC has made it about the institution of the Supreme Court. The quote Clement highlighted in his reply I think captures what NYC thinks of the Supreme Court ("Five Guys...") and I think was chosen strategically.

    Clement IMO gave them just enough to say that the case is not moot. If NYC gets hammered, its their own fault. This was a risky strategy with a high likelihood of backfiring.
     
    Elliotte

    Elliotte

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 11, 2011
    1,207
    Loudoun County VA
    CurlyDave said:
    I have to agree.

    I think the SC is in a bind. Almost nothing survives strict scrutiny, but the Circuit Courts claim to have been applying intermediate scrutiny which lead to nonsensical decisions.

    Unless they invent a new, unique to the 2A, level of scrutiny, which the Circuit Courts will soon start ignoring, the only place to go is strict. I don't think they have the votes for strict.

    More popcorn.
    Click to expand...
    I thought they did back in Heller? They ignored tiers of scrutiny in the majority opinion and went with the Historical Context review. It was Breyer in the dissent that created the 2A-two-step the lower courts have been using. But for whatever reason (Kennedy & Roberts) the Court hasn't taken another case defending the Historical Context method.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
    Guns International Ad

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,538
    Messages
    7,285,526
    Members
    33,475
    Latest member
    LikeThatHendrix

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom