Supreme Court Takes Major NRA Second Amendment Case from New York

CrabcakesAndFootball · Apr 12, 2019

Roe v Wade was moot too. Time to strike back

Some Guy · Apr 13, 2019

I hope there's an argument that says thiy case should continue because the city quashed rights via rule-making to begin with. The city hasn't acknowledged why the current rule should be changed, or referenced its unconstitutionally. Therefore, they could just as easily revert to the current rule or worse once this case is dropped.

SCOTUS needs to hear this and other similar cases. Cities and states are acting capriciously. SCOTUS must intervene to clarify theses issues.

Blacksmith101 · Apr 13, 2019

The anti's are starting to run scared. They do not want things to come to a head. First it was the carry case in DC and now they are trying to head this case off.

While the Demanding Mom's are full court press to add new unconstitutional restrictive laws Bloomberg's pet lawyers, Democratic AG's, are working to prevent any actual decisions from being made. If I can see it I am sure the Justices also know it is happening.

We live in interesting times.

swinokur · Apr 13, 2019

H/T DC-W.
.

danb · Apr 13, 2019

So if I am in NYC and I am going to FL on vacation, would this allow me to take my gun?

I'll be curious what Clement has to say about this.

Technically this is only proposed rulemaking which means the final rule could be very different.

Allen65 · Apr 13, 2019

danb said:
So if I am in NYC and I am going to FL on vacation, would this allow me to take my gun?

I'll be curious what Clement has to say about this.

Technically this is only proposed rulemaking which means the final rule could be very different.

NY is asking SCOTUS to stay briefings until they pass a revised law, which is nothing more than stalling for time. Hopefully SCOTUS won't take the bait, and will take briefs. If NY actually changes their law prior to a decision, then the case is mooted if the justices agree, but in the meantime the pressure would still be on NY to not try to drag out the legislative or judicial processes.

GTOGUNNER · Apr 13, 2019

Justice delayed is justice denied.

Too little too late I think.

FrankZ · Apr 13, 2019

Shenanigans I say, shenanigans!

ed bernay · Apr 13, 2019

The NYC letter doesn't mention someone that wants to take their legally owned firearm to a friend's house out of state to shoot on their property. It appears that will still not be permitted. NYC bureaucrats have nerve to think they can define what are legitimate reasons to take your legally owned property out of the state.

krucam · Apr 13, 2019

Can’t wait to see Paul Clement’s response to this one...

Kharn · Apr 13, 2019

Hopefully Clements can shoot enough holes in their plea to prevent a dismissal.

krucam · Apr 13, 2019

Kharn said:
Hopefully Clements can shoot enough holes in their plea to prevent a dismissal.

Jinx...

pdsmith505 · Apr 13, 2019

Forget em. It's just a proposed rule change. It's not even a city ordinance for christ's sake. There's nothing stopping NYC from reverting once the case is dropped.

Voluntary Cessation
If a defendant voluntarily terminates the allegedly unlawful conduct after the lawsuit has been filed but retains the power to resume the practice at any time, a federal court may deem the case nonmoot. The "heavy burden" of persuading the court that a case has been mooted by the defendant's voluntary actions lies with the party asserting mootness, and the standard for such a determination is a "stringent" one: "if subsequent events ma[ke] it absolutely clear that the allegedly wrongful behavior [can] not reasonably be expected to recur." This exception is supported by the Supreme Court because, in addition to ensuring that the defendant is not "free to return to his old ways," there is "a public interest in having the legality of the practices settled."

Citations of court rulings are in the footnotes from the web-page I pulled it from.

https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RS22599.html#_Toc230583185

swinokur · Apr 13, 2019

The reg applies to NYC residents with Premise permits.

It offers no protection to those who do not

Complete stalling tactic

Racer Doug14 · Apr 13, 2019

Screw NY and NYC! Unconstitutional law and BS rules. "Shall not be infringed ".

MigraineMan · Apr 13, 2019

So the NYCrown is offering the peasants a few crumbs? That's mighty white of them.

Racer Doug14 · Apr 13, 2019

MigraineMan said:
So the NYCrown is offering the peasants a few crumbs? That's mighty white of them.

The Grace of the Crown

danb · Apr 13, 2019

Exceptions to mootness doctrine:

Voluntary Cessation

If a defendant voluntarily terminates the allegedly unlawful conduct after the lawsuit has been filed but retains the power to resume the practice at any time, a federal court may deem the case nonmoot.25 The "heavy burden" of persuading the court that a case has been mooted by the defendant's voluntary actions lies with the party asserting mootness, and the standard for such a determination is a "stringent" one: "if subsequent events ma[ke] it absolutely clear that the allegedly wrongful behavior [can] not reasonably be expected to recur."26 This exception is supported by the Supreme Court because, in addition to ensuring that the defendant is not "free to return to his old ways," there is "a public interest in having the legality of the practices settled."27

https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RS22599.html

Anyone have any doubt NYC could return to it's old ways the day after the case was mooted?

No.

The Surpreme Court should foreclose the possibility.

Kharn · Apr 13, 2019

Didn't Jersey swear they would change or have a state-level loss they used to claim a SC cert petition was moot, then immediately went back to the same ol' crap once cert was denied? Might have been Drake?

press1280 · Apr 13, 2019

Kharn said:
Didn't Jersey swear they would change or have a state-level loss they used to claim a SC cert petition was moot, then immediately went back to the same ol' crap once cert was denied? Might have been Drake?

One of the applicants got a permit but there were other applicants who didn't get one. Reason they gave the one permit was because it was so egregious and probably feared it looked bad enough that Scotus would take it

Supreme Court Takes Major NRA Second Amendment Case from New York

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Grumpy Old Man

In a State of Bliss

Attachments

dont be a dumbass

Ultimate Member

IANAL, PATRIOT PICKET!!

Liberty = Responsibility

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Member

In a State of Bliss

Thread killer

Defenestration Specialist

Thread killer

dont be a dumbass

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics