Supreme Court Takes Major NRA Second Amendment Case from New York

[jcutonilli]

the transcript of the hearing will be public the day after the hearing. Rather than getting it 2nd hand or 3rd hand from any source, I recommend reading the transcript directly.

According to https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcript/2019 the transcripts are available by the end of the same day.

Transcripts do not reflect the tone and other non-verbal clues that can play very significant roles in the true meaning of any statement. The pace of the questions and answers are lost as well.

You can also listen to the podcast.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_audio/2019

The audio recording is posted on Fridays after the Conference.

Oyez (https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/) posts an audio version aligned with the transcript. They highlight the justice that is speaking.

 

[Pope414]

the transcript of the hearing will be public the day after the hearing. Rather than getting it 2nd hand or 3rd hand from any source, I recommend reading the transcript directly.

Most def. will be reading the transcripts I am interested in the body language and demeanor ..you can't read that in a transcript

 

[Pope414]

According to https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcript/2019 the transcripts are available by the end of the same day.





The audio recording is posted on Fridays after the Conference.

Oyez (https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/) posts an audio version aligned with the transcript. They highlight the justice that is speaking.

I didnt know that thank you

 

[Kharn]

The Court will release the audio recording earlier if it is a case of significant interest IIRC.

CSpan had Heller that evening I believe.

 

[jcutonilli]

The Court will release the audio recording earlier if it is a case of significant interest IIRC.

CSpan had Heller that evening I believe.

Was the audio recorded by the court or by CSPAN? According to the SCOTUS website, the SCOTUS audio for pre 2010 terms (ie Heller) were not available until the next term. This suggests that any audio was likely recorded by CSPAN. I looked to see if they ban audio recording, but do not see anything specifically stating it is banned. They do ban photos and video though.

 

[motorcoachdoug]

please if someone from MDS gets in to the hearing please post your thoughts...we can't trust the media to give it to us straight . #twoweeks!!!!!!!!

Will make sure my cell has a full charge on it before I enter the courtroom. Not sure if i can turn it on while the arguments are going on or if i will have to wait until its over. Thinking of taking the Redline down to Union Station, then walk to SCOTUS since it is not a far walk. Do not know where I would be able to park plus I do not feel like driving down in rush hour to SCOTUS as well.Will have my MDS pin on also in case anyone else decides to show up.

 

[danb]

tips for attending oral argument:

https://reason.com/2019/11/18/how-to-attend-oral-arguments-at-the-supreme-court/

basically only 50 members of the public can attend. There is likely to be a long line, people paid to wait in line and hold a place, and people get there days before for cases of high interest (and camp out).

The Supreme Court does not sell tickets. Generally, the Court reserves at least 50 seats for each argument day for the general public. (The total number of general admission tickets will depend on how many other seats are reserved.) People who want to attend oral arguments form a line along First Street that snakes around East Capitol Street NE. For high-profile cases, the line can form several days in advance. These brave souls have to endure the elements. Before the DACA case, people huddled under tarps to stay dry during the rain. Around 7:00 a.m., the Supreme Court will issue golden tickets, numbered 1 through 50, to the first 50 people on line. Those tickets will generally guarantee admission to the argument. Those who are beyond #50 may be able to attend argument if any seats remain vacant. They may also be able to cycle through, and watch three minutes of oral arguments.

 

[jcutonilli]

This is going to be a well attended argument. They have already restricted the media

https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/media/mediaadvisories/ma10-23-19

 

[Kharn]

McDonald had ~20 seats as the 3 minute seats IIRC.

 

[frogman68]

Will make sure my cell has a full charge on it before I enter the courtroom. Not sure if i can turn it on while the arguments are going on or if i will have to wait until its over. Thinking of taking the Redline down to Union Station, then walk to SCOTUS since it is not a far walk. Do not know where I would be able to park plus I do not feel like driving down in rush hour to SCOTUS as well.Will have my MDS pin on also in case anyone else decides to show up.

Orange line to Capitol South , if getting to a orange line station is easier

 

[motorcoachdoug]

Orange line to Capitol South , if getting to a orange line station is easier

No I will be taking the Red Line from Glenmont. First train is 5:05am. I know my wife takes that train to work

 

[jcutonilli]

Responses to SG letter are up

NYSRPA

http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketP...0_2019-11-20 NYSRPA response letter FINAL.pdf

NYC

http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketP...1120135626500_18-280 NYSRPA v. CNY letter.pdf

 

[danb]

is this true? They require disclosure of everything including parking tickets even if the case is dismissed or nullified?

the City’s licensing application not only requires an applicant to disclose any arrest, indictment, or summons other than a parking violation, but also expressly commands: “YOU MUST DO THIS EVEN IF: the case was dismissed, the record sealed or the case nullified by operation of law.” JA96-97 (italics added); see also JA102-03.

The City is in a tricky position representing that past violations will not be held against applicants. To make such representation they need to essentially concede unconstitutionality of the statute in the first place.

Not do they even make that representation.

 

[motorcoachdoug]

Very interesting reading submitted by both parties. I believe their will be massive ah verbal fireworks on 02Dec19 at SCOTUS

 

[danb]

If I were on the court, I would be pretty frickin annoyed at all these shennanigans and inclined to old it against the City. What a waste of a lot of peoples time over a transparent attempt to frustrate the courts review. They did not even follow procedure the first time and had their first letter rejected by the clerk.

 

[Steel Hunter]

Responses to SG letter are up

NYSRPA

http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketP...0_2019-11-20 NYSRPA response letter FINAL.pdf

NYC

http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketP...1120135626500_18-280 NYSRPA v. CNY letter.pdf

NYC spent the entire letter trying to get a case dismissed that isn't going to be.

Link to full docket since it's back a few pages: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/18-280.html

 

[Some Guy]

Thanks for all the commentary on this. NYC is out of control with these laws. This case is many things, but moot is not one of them.

 

[jcutonilli]

The Court will release the audio recording earlier if it is a case of significant interest IIRC.

CSpan had Heller that evening I believe.

Was the audio recorded by the court or by CSPAN? According to the SCOTUS website, the SCOTUS audio for pre 2010 terms (ie Heller) were not available until the next term. This suggests that any audio was likely recorded by CSPAN. I looked to see if they ban audio recording, but do not see anything specifically stating it is banned. They do ban photos and video though.

I just found some more information about the court releasing audio. According to https://fixthecourt.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Circuit-Scorecard-Report-FTC-FINAL.pdf SCOTUS has released audio on the day of argument 27 times in its history. It has done it only twice since Apr 2015. It is possible that they may release it, but not very probable based on history.

Here is a GAO report on the issue
https://www.gao.gov/assets/680/676857.pdf

This report indicates that Heller was one of the 27 cases they released audio for. The appendix does show a significant number of cases where the request to release the audio on the same day was denied.

 

[Boxcab]

Repeat from another thread... it belongs here...

{The Scene: A dark room with only one brightly lit, pendent light, suspended over the center of a green, felt covered table.

Actor: A single player is hunched over the table, vigorously shaking 9 dice in his hands. The player is wearing camouflage shirt and pants. The back of the shirt is imprinted with,

NYSR&P Assoc.
v.
City of New York

The player, in heavy, deep tones whispers the following, as he tosses the dice into the splash of light in the center of the green felt,

“Com’on Strict Scrutiny!”

End Scene}

.

 

[HaveBlue]

NYSRPA is on the CSPAN calendar: https://www.c-span.org/supremeCourt/calendar/

It’s also listed as TBD on this schedule: https://www.c-span.org/schedule/?date=2019-12-02&channel=today

There are quite a few “videos” of previous SCOTUS orals. The have the audio but only show the photos of whoever is speaking.

It’s not clear what the delay is between the arguments and publishing.