Murdock v Pa - SCOTUS rules "cannot lic a right"

[UNcommon Arms]

Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105 (1943) ruled that you CANNOT lic a right.

The ruling pertained to the 1st Amendment, but the language and ruling also apply to the 2nd, 3rd, 4th.... Eventually, O'Malley's unconstitutional gun licensing will be nullified by SCOTUS.

 

[hvymax]

Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105 (1943) ruled that you CANNOT lic a right.

The ruling pertained to the 1st Amendment, but the language and ruling also apply to the 2nd, 3rd, 4th.... Eventually, O'Malley's unconstitutional gun licensing will be nullified by SCOTUS.

Yeah right!! Just like most notably in the home has been as clarified as depleted uranium!!!!

 

[UNcommon Arms]

Yeah right!! Just like most notably in the home has been as clarified as depleted uranium!!!!

It's a matter of law. So unless the SCOTIS wants to reverse slavery they would likewise uphold Murdock v. PA.

 

[A1Uni]

My concern is that several other states have similar licensing schemes that have stood against legal challenges.

I guess time will tell.

 

[paperwork351]

I think most of those challenges were pre Heller/McCormick with all that collective silliness.

 

[hogrider]

My concern is that several other states have similar licensing schemes that have stood against legal challenges.

I guess time will tell.

Were those legal challenges in the SCOTUS?

 

[EL1227]

I think most of those challenges were pre Heller/McDonald with all that collective silliness.

Fixed for ya ...

 

[frogman68]

Were those legal challenges in the SCOTUS?

Burton vs Sills was declined at SCOTUS so N.J licensing law is "legal"