Go Back   Maryland Shooters > Gun Rights and Legislation > National 2A Issues
Don't Have An Account? Register Here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 20th, 2020, 09:15 AM #1
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: WV
Posts: 6,040
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: WV
Posts: 6,040
NYC CCW case is at SCOTUS!

Hat tip to Calguns. This case wasn't on my radar at all. NRA/Paul Clement on the brief https://d3uwh8jpzww49g.cloudfront.ne...tion-final.pdf
It was just filed a few days ago, there's no SCOTUS docket page that I can find.
press1280 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2020, 10:11 AM #2
Allen65 Allen65 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Anne Arundel County
Posts: 3,531
Allen65 Allen65 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Anne Arundel County
Posts: 3,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
Hat tip to Calguns. This case wasn't on my radar at all. NRA/Paul Clement on the brief https://d3uwh8jpzww49g.cloudfront.ne...tion-final.pdf
It was just filed a few days ago, there's no SCOTUS docket page that I can find.
I wonder if NY will try to moot this one, too?
Allen65 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2020, 11:03 AM #3
wjackcooper wjackcooper is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 678
wjackcooper wjackcooper is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 678
Wow, thanks for posting press 1280!

Paul Clement:

“As this Court made clear in both Heller and McDonald, the Second Amendment, at its core, guarantees a right to keep and bear arms for self- defense. . . . That commonsense conclusion is compelled by the text and structure of the Second Amendment, by the history of the right it protects, and by any fair reading of both Heller and McDonald.
. . .
“Millions of law-abiding Americans are suffering a shifting patchwork of denials of a constitutional right that most states, jurists, and this Court recognize as fundamental.
. . .
“And the Fourth Circuit in Woollard did not even acknowledge historical inquiry as a component of Heller’s analysis; instead, the court held that Maryland’s carry regime withstood scrutiny without so much as considering the scope of the right. See 712 F.3d at 874-76.
. . .
Text, history, and tradition readily confirm that the Second Amendment protects a right to carry a firearm outside the home for self-defense.
. . .
Time and again, courts have effectively replaced Heller’s textually and historically grounded analysis with a loose form of “interest-balancing” in which the state always wins.”

Seems to me the odds favor a 5 - 4, if not a 6 - 3 win.

Yea!

Regards
Jack

Last edited by wjackcooper; December 20th, 2020 at 11:22 AM. Reason: 6 -3 not 4
wjackcooper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 23rd, 2020, 12:16 PM #4
MichaelZWilliamson MichaelZWilliamson is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 67
MichaelZWilliamson MichaelZWilliamson is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjackcooper View Post
Wow, thanks for posting press 1280!


Seems to me the odds favor a 5 - 4, if not a 6 - 3 win.

Yea!

Regards
Jack
Stevens--against
Thomas--for
Breyer--squishy
Alito--for
Sotomayor--against
Kagan--against
Gorsuch--for
Kavanaugh--on record that if a law exists for "long enough" it can't be challenged. He seems to regard two years as long enough
Barrett--unknown. Her only 2A case was about restoration of existing rights, not expanding

So it's 3:3 with two probably nots and an unknown.
MichaelZWilliamson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2020, 11:44 AM #5
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: WV
Posts: 6,040
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: WV
Posts: 6,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allen65 View Post
I wonder if NY will try to moot this one, too?
Only way to moot it is to go shall issue. Plaintiffs arenít claiming any special need (carrying cash, valuables,exc), so if they get a license then everyone does.
press1280 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2020, 01:52 PM #6
Allen65 Allen65 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Anne Arundel County
Posts: 3,531
Allen65 Allen65 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Anne Arundel County
Posts: 3,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
Only way to moot it is to go shall issue. Plaintiffs aren’t claiming any special need (carrying cash, valuables,exc), so if they get a license then everyone does.
Not quite. NY could find that the two individual plaintiffs and every current member of NYSRPA have "proper cause" to be issued a permit.
Allen65 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2020, 01:53 PM #7
Occam Occam is offline
Recovering Lurker
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Montgomery County
Posts: 13,314
Occam Occam is offline
Recovering Lurker
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Montgomery County
Posts: 13,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allen65 View Post
Not quite. NY could find that the two individual plaintiffs and every member of NYSRPA have "proper cause" to be issued a permit.
Which would be so blatantly an attempt at preventing cert from a now more solidly originalist slate of justices that I think they'd lose even harder if they tried something that moronic.
Occam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2020, 02:02 PM #8
Allen65 Allen65 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Anne Arundel County
Posts: 3,531
Allen65 Allen65 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Anne Arundel County
Posts: 3,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by Occam View Post
Which would be so blatantly an attempt at preventing cert from a now more solidly originalist slate of justices that I think they'd lose even harder if they tried something that moronic.
It would be a huge gamble, with the current SCOTUS makeup. But Cuomo's ego and mistaken belief in his own intellectual and moral superiority are certainly big enough for him to try it. I'll be standing by with popcorn for what will hopefully be an epic smackdown for NY.
Allen65 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2020, 02:00 PM #9
teratos's Avatar
teratos teratos is offline
My hair is amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bel Air
Posts: 39,681
teratos teratos is offline
My hair is amazing
teratos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bel Air
Posts: 39,681
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allen65 View Post
Not quite. NY could find that the two individual plaintiffs and every current member of NYSRPA have "proper cause" to be issued a permit.
Unless SCOTUS favors shall-issue or Constitutional carry.
teratos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2020, 03:32 PM #10
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: WV
Posts: 6,040
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: WV
Posts: 6,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allen65 View Post
Not quite. NY could find that the two individual plaintiffs and every current member of NYSRPA have "proper cause" to be issued a permit.
NYC already said they werenít in a special circumstance so a reversal at this point would be so obvious even the liberal justices would know exactly what theyíre doing.
press1280 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Home Page > Forum List > Gun Rights and Legislation > National 2A Issues


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
© 2021, Congregate Media, LP Privacy Policy Terms of Service