Supreme Court Takes Major NRA Second Amendment Case from New York

[wolfwood]

New activity in the New York Transport case that is before the Supreme Court. Looks like NYC"s brief is still due August 5, 2019.

Jul 26 2019 Motion for a further extension of time to file respondents' brief on the merits denied.

 

[Occam]

New activity in the New York Transport case that is before the Supreme Court. Looks like NYC"s brief is still due August 5, 2019.

Jul 26 2019 Motion for a further extension of time to file respondents' brief on the merits denied.

This makes me happy. I think.

 

[krucam]

Extension request denied...
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/18-280.html

 

[GTOGUNNER]

New activity in the New York Transport case that is before the Supreme Court. Looks like NYC"s brief is still due August 5, 2019.



Jul 26 2019 Motion for a further extension of time to file respondents' brief on the merits denied.

Sweet!

 

[danb]

Well this ought to be interesting.

 

[Blacksmith101]

Maybe the Court is getting tired of New York's shenanigans.

 

[nedsurf]

Maybe the Court is getting tired of New York's shenanigans.

Agreed. It seems rare that extensions are denied.

 

[Kharn]

Well that's a kick in the privates.

 

[lazarus]

That's for transporting intrastate. Nothing in MD law says that you can't go to Peacemaker for the day for some pew pew pew.

That would fall under target shooting, which is legal. And it is for transport period. Nothing about intrastate transport. FOPA covers you if you transport in a certain manner and you still must comply with the state laws in your state of destination and the state you originate while in those states.

 

[esqappellate]

That would fall under target shooting, which is legal. And it is for transport period. Nothing about intrastate transport. FOPA covers you if you transport in a certain manner and you still must comply with the state laws in your state of destination and the state you originate while in those states.

Well, not quite. Section 926A expressly preempts any state law or local law if the interstate "transport" is done in compliance with the conditions imposed by Section 926A, regardless of whether that transport would violate state law. It must be legal for the person who is engaged in that transport to possess and carry at the "place" of the origin and at the "place" of the destination. And the person must transport in compliance with 926A, viz., the firearm locked and separated from the ammo in a separate container. If you do all that perfectly and you are solely engaged in the act of "transport" (whatever that means), then you have an affirmative defense.

 

[lazarus]

Well, not quite. Section 926A expressly preempts any state law or local law if the interstate "transport" is done in compliance with the conditions imposed by Section 926A, regardless of whether that transport would violate state law. It must be legal for the person who is engaged in that transport to possess and carry at the "place" of the origin and at the "place" of the destination. And the person must transport in compliance with 926A, viz., the firearm locked and separated from the ammo in a separate container. If you do all that perfectly and you are solely engaged in the act of "transport" (whatever that means), then you have an affirmative defense.

Oh, good to know. So the posses and carry would more simply mean “you can have it”. So if I went from my house where I can legally have a handgun, transport it per 926A to, say, West Virginia where constitutional Carey is fine for a week of camping...I’d be okay. Because I possessed and carried the firearm legally at my destination and at my point of origin and abused by 926A as to the manner in which it is transported?

 

[Stoveman]

Oh, good to know. So the posses and carry would more simply mean “you can have it”. So if I went from my house where I can legally have a handgun, transport it per 926A to, say, West Virginia where constitutional Carey is fine for a week of camping...I’d be okay. Because I possessed and carried the firearm legally at my destination and at my point of origin and abused by 926A as to the manner in which it is transported?

Why wouldn't you?


People without carry permits fly out of BWI every day to Free America and carry in accordance with applicable state laws. Or they drive to say Richmond and open carry in the Capitol building.

 

[esqappellate]

Oh, good to know. So the posses and carry would more simply mean “you can have it”. So if I went from my house where I can legally have a handgun, transport it per 926A to, say, West Virginia where constitutional Carey is fine for a week of camping...I’d be okay. Because I possessed and carried the firearm legally at my destination and at my point of origin and abused by 926A as to the manner in which it is transported?

This not legal advice so don’t rely on it. So, there is no 4th Circuit caselaw on this. There is a chance that some court might construe 926A very narrowly

 

[danb]

Cant wait to see what NYC cooks up. They are between a rock and a hard place here.

 

[Blacksmith101]

Cant wait to see what NYC cooks up. They are between a rock and a hard place here.

Five day countdown starts at Midnight!

 

[xKtF]

What happens once NYC submits their brief? What is the next step?

 

[danb]

This one has had more twists and turns than a roller coaster at Six Flags, so its hard to predict what the Aug 5 brief will say, or what the next twist will be.

 

[press1280]

What happens once NYC submits their brief? What is the next step?

I assume NYSRPA will get to reply. Then at some point the court has to make the decision to continue or rule it moot

 

[danb]

Who knows, the Supreme Court may even schedule oral arguments for both the merits and also the mootness, maybe to discuss voluntary cessation doctrine or whatever Clement cooks up. I think that would be both hysterical and totally appropriate if NYC talked them into double work here...

 

[Kharn]

The December argument calendar is the next available one, October and November have been announced. Unless the Justices do something drastic and hold an additional afternoon session on the mootness question, as normal arguments are two one hour sessions in the morning per argument day.