Supreme Court Takes Major NRA Second Amendment Case from New York

Boxcab said:

When is kick-off time?

Click to expand...

hdatontodo said:

https://www.scotusblog.com/events/

Hover over the case title in the calendar

Click to expand...

Boxcab said:

When is kick-off time?

Click to expand...

18-280 NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSN., INC. V. CITY OF NEW YORK

DECISION BELOW: 883 F.3d 45

CERT. GRANTED 1/22/2019

QUESTION PRESENTED:

New York City prohibits its residents from possessing a handgun without a
license, and the only license the City makes available to most residents allows its holder
to possess her handgun only in her home or en route to one of seven shooting ranges
within the city. The City thus bans its residents from transporting a handgun to any place
outside city limits-even if the handgun is unloaded and locked in a container separate
from its ammunition, and even if the owner seeks to transport it only to a second home
for the core constitutionally protected purpose of selfdefense,
or to a more convenient
out-of-city shooting range to hone its safe and effective use.
The City asserts that its transport ban promotes public safety by limiting the
presence of handguns on city streets. But the City put forth no empirical evidence that
transporting an unloaded handgun, locked in a container separate from its ammunition,
poses a meaningful risk to public safety. Moreover, even if there were such a risk, the
City's restriction poses greater safety risks by encouraging residents who are leaving
town to leave their handguns behind in vacant homes, and it serves only to increase the
frequency of handgun transport within city limits by forcing many residents to use an incity
range rather than more convenient ranges elsewhere.

The question presented is:

Whether the City's ban on transporting a licensed, locked, and unloaded handgun
to a home or shooting range outside city limits is consistent with the Second
Amendment, the Commerce Clause, and the constitutional right to travel.

LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: 15-638

Click to expand...

Inigoes said:

A good article explaining the case to date:

https://www.subscriptlaw.com/blog/ny-rifle-and-pistol-v-nyc

Click to expand...

Cal68 said:

Thanks for posting this link. It really helped a non-lawyer like me because it used simple language to describe complex legal distinctions.

Based upon the last sentence in the article, can I assume that the SCOTUS has decided that the issue is not "moot" and therefore are hearing the case today?

I hope that after today's legal arguments in the SCOTUS, a similarly easily understandable review article will come out for folks like me!

Cal68

Click to expand...

Defense Rifle said:

What are the possible rulings?

Could we expect nationwide open carry?

Or all states becoming shall-issue for CC?

I'm thinking SCOTUS is going to rule that the right to keep and bear arms extends outside the home hence state governments must either allow open carry or concealed carry (shall issue).

I've read Kavanaugh and Gorsuch both use an originalist framework, so they believe fully in carrying of firearms in public just like in the 18th century.

Click to expand...

Reflecting the high stakes, more than three dozen supporting legal briefs have been filed. The Trump administration, 25 mainly Republican states and 120 members of the House of Representatives are on the side of the gun owners.

A dozen Democratic-led states and 139 House lawmakers back the city. In addition, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., a vocal critic of the present Supreme Court, filed a brief joined by four Democratic Senate colleagues that asked the justices to dismiss the case and resist being drawn into what he called a political project.

Whitehouse also included a warning to the justices. “The Supreme Court is not well. And the people know it. Perhaps the Court can heal itself before the public demands it be ‘restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics,'” he wrote, quoting a public opinion poll showing support for such changes.

All 53 Republican senators responded with a letter urging the court not to be cowed by the Democrats’ threats.

A decision is expected by late June.

Click to expand...

ironpony said:

Says 10 - 11 am, is that approximate start time or the length of time this case gets today?

Click to expand...