5/15/20 - Could be a big SCOTUS announcement

[Mike S]

From SCOTUS Blog:

This week’s most intriguing development is a follow-on to our last post. After the Supreme Court denied as moot the closely watched Second Amendment case New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. City of New York, New York, Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote a brief opinion concurring in the dismissal to note that he shared the concerns of dissenting justices that the lower courts were misapplying the court’s Second Amendment precedents. He wrote that “[t]he Court should address that issue soon, perhaps in one of the several Second Amendment cases with petitions for certiorari now pending before the Court.” That week, the court released 10 Second Amendment cases it had been holding for the New York case. This week, it has relisted every one of them.

The 10 cases address a host of issues, ranging from the constitutionality of the federal ban on interstate handgun sales, to whether the Second Amendment guarantees a right to carry firearms outside the home for self-defense, to the constitutionality of various states’ and localities’ firearmrestrictions. We should know next Monday which of them is plenary grant material.

Link: Relist Watch: And then there were guns - SCOTUSblog

Let's hope for a date with Maura before SCOTUS.

 

[Devils Paintbrush]

It would be awesome to one day see that Brett Kavanaugh and the crap he was put through could one day become gun owners' wrath and help sweep away some of our restrictive gun laws.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

The gap between "desired social policy" and "what the constitution mandates" is so great as to make some heads explode.

 

[not new guy]

The gap between "desired social policy" and "what the constitution mandates" is so great as to make some heads explode.

Unfortunately some of the justices are more interested with the former than the latter.

 

[appraiser]

Unfortunately they have already upheld Lautenberg, that is the one law that has screwed people than any other IMHO

 

[Drix]

Not going to hold my breath, we've heard this before.

 

[DarthRevan]

Man good thing I have the day off so I can day drink once nothing gets picked up.

 

[Mesatchornug]

Man good thing I have the day off so I can day drink once nothing gets picked up.

I'm going to get started now.

 

[amm5061]

I'm going to get started now.

Good idea. I might just do that, too.

 

[crispnipz]

Not going to hold my breath, we've heard this before.

Man good thing I have the day off so I can day drink once nothing gets picked up.

Not getting picked up isn't the same as getting denied. The NYC v NYSRPA case was conferenced 3 times before they took it according to Guns and Gadgets.

Unfortunately they have already upheld Lautenberg, that is the one law that has screwed people than any other IMHO

True, that law has screwed many people. But is it as arbitrary as the issues raised in the pending cases? I lived on the wrong side of the Medford/Malden town line at the intersection of MA-28 and MA-60 when I applied for my LTC, so I can't carry on it. Or a guy who inherits a house on the MA side of the Methuen/Salem, NH town line can't buy a new AR but his buddy in Salem can. Arbitrary criteria, in both cases decided by 1 person who probably (legally?) should not have the authority to have done so.

 

[308rifleman]

UOTE="Mesatchornug, post: 6735458, member: 29100"]
I'm going to get started now.
[/QUOTE]
Make sure you have a nice big bowl of popcorn sitting next to you. Not good to drink on an empty stomach!

 

[Bladerunner]

The Cases:

Mance v. Barr – Whether the federal ban on interstate handgun sales violates the Second Amendment or the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment.

Rogers v. Grewal – In a challenge to New Jersey’s handgun carry permit scheme, whether the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense; and whether the government can condition the right to carry a handgun outside the home on the showing of a special need to carry a firearm.

Pena v. Horan – In a challenge to a California law banning most commonly used handguns, the petition asks the justices to weigh in on the scope of the Second Amendment.

Gould v. Lipson – In a challenge to Massachusetts’ handgun carry permit scheme, whether the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense; and whether the government can condition the right to carry a handgun outside the home on the showing of a special need to carry a firearm.

Cheeseman v. Polillo – Challenge to New Jersey handgun carry permit scheme.

Ciolek v. New Jersey – Challenge to New Jersey handgun carry permit scheme.

Worman v. Healey – Challenge to Massachusetts ban on the possession of assault weapons and large-capacity magazines.

Malpasso v. Pallozzi – In a challenge to Maryland’s handgun carry permit scheme, whether the Second Amendment protects the right to carry handguns outside the home for self-defense.

Culp v. Raoul – Whether the Second Amendment requires Illinois to allow nonresidents to apply for a concealed-carry license.

Wilson v. Cook County – Challenge to Cook County’s ban on assault rifles and large-capacity magazines, as well as to the Second Amendment analysis used by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit to uphold the ban.

 

[Salyeica]

If we could only get one, which one would you want it to be? What ruling in our favor would have the greatest impact on the Second Amendment going forward?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Unfortunately they have already upheld Lautenberg, that is the one law that has screwed people than any other IMHO

What is necessary (and unlikely) is a decision that since the 2A is a right, that deprivation of that right is a punishment, subject to all legal restrictions on punishments under law - including due process (void in places like MA) and ex-post-facto considerations (a big issue with Lautenberg). The MA courts have been consistent, even post Heller - deprivation of an LTC is a mere administrative act, not an act of punishment, so due process protections do not apply.

Until the courts recognize deprivation of a right as punishment, it will at best be a right of the second class.

 

[Bladerunner]

If we could only get one, which one would you want it to be? What ruling in our favor would have the greatest impact on the Second Amendment going forward?

Anything that strikes down the suitability requirement. No single person can have that much power over our natural right to self defense.

 

[crispnipz]

If we could only get one, which one would you want it to be? What ruling in our favor would have the greatest impact on the Second Amendment going forward?

One of the CCW cases. I feel either Rogers or Gould is the strongest because of the specific questions they are asking. Every infringement is egregious, but for the other ones, there can be workarounds (i.e. buy a preban firearm). CCW is one of the most core elements of 2A (the bearing of keep and bear). For people who were licensed in bad MA towns or who live in NJ or parts of CA (or NYC, or other liberal nightmares), there is pretty much no workaround. We are stuck.

 

[granitestater]

Unfortunately they have already upheld Lautenberg, that is the one law that has screwed people than any other IMHO

no it hasn’t , easy don’t beat your wife.

Not getting picked up isn't the same as getting denied. The NYC v NYSRPA case was conferenced 3 times before they took it according to Guns and Gadgets.

True, that law has screwed many people. But is it as arbitrary as the issues raised in the pending cases? I lived on the wrong side of the Medford/Malden town line at the intersection of MA-28 and MA-60 when I applied for my LTC, so I can't carry on it. Or a guy who inherits a house on the MA side of the Methuen/Salem, NH town line can't buy a new AR but his buddy in Salem can. Arbitrary criteria, in both cases decided by 1 person who probably (legally?) should not have the authority to have done so.

sadly many republicans who claim to support the second amendment push so called states rights and are comfortable with the methuen / Salem example you gave. I’m not. Americans have constitutional rights no matter where they live.

One of the CCW cases. I feel either Rogers or Gould is the strongest because of the specific questions they are asking. Every infringement is egregious, but for the other ones, there can be workarounds (i.e. buy a preban firearm). CCW is one of the most core elements of 2A (the bearing of keep and bear). For people who were licensed in bad MA towns or who live in NJ or parts of CA (or NYC, or other liberal nightmares), there is pretty much no workaround. We are stuck.

yes but with every passing year, pre ban magazines and guns get that much more worn out and less functional.

 

[general disorder]

don't worry chuck I wont pull the football away this time. Yet I will try to kick it again.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

no it hasn’t , easy don’t beat your wife.

Regardless, or irregardless, of the offense the defendant who pleads guilty should be able to look at the punishment in the deal being offered and be confident the system will not add additional punishments to be applied retroactively at a later time. In many cases this can impact the "go to trial or cop a plea" decision.

Recent developments with lab tests coming back "substance not a prohibited drug" ... after the defendant pled guilty to possession out of fear of a wrongful conviction, show just how corrupt the plea bargain system is.

The wording should be "do not be accused of threatening violence upon a family member". We all know accused==guilt when it comes to this sort of offense, and even an offense involving a threat without actual violence meets the Latenberg criteria.

 

[Dennis in MA]

If we could only get one, which one would you want it to be? What ruling in our favor would have the greatest impact on the Second Amendment going forward?

combine all of the NJ and right to carry cases and then the rest are tied for first. Lol

Buy anywhee
No carry restrictions
All common arms everywhere.

Nuffsaid.

 

[appraiser]

no it hasn’t , easy don’t beat your wife.

I can fill volumes with the tales of men who had 209A orders pulled on them as part of divorce proceedings without so much as one C hair of evidence to back it up

209A Restraining Orders Can Be Abused

Family law attorney Nicole K. Levy reviews how 209A restraining orders can be falsely obtained through exaggerated or false claims of abuse.

www.lynchowens.com

 

[LittleCalm]

sadly many republicans who claim to support the second amendment push so called states rights and are comfortable with the methuen / Salem example you gave. I’m not. Americans have constitutional rights no matter where they live.

I thought MacDonald extended 2A to the states via 14A? Can't recall.

 

[ChevyGuy91]

combine all of the NJ and right to carry cases and then the rest are tied for first. Lol

Buy anywhee
No carry restrictions
All common arms everywhere.

Nuffsaid.

Yeaaaah, talk freedom to me.

 

[71montess]

As for 209a, as with other offenses, what you might have done in your early twenty’s , doesnt mean you would do in your 30s,40s or 50s ... why forever ?

 

[Bladerunner]

Anything that strikes down the suitability requirement. No single person can have that much power over our natural right to self defense.

Everyone should read this:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-1272/94861/20190401112107899_Gould%20Petition.pdf

Excellent writing.

 

[milktree]

no it hasn’t , easy don’t beat get accused of beating, or threatening your wife.

FIFY

 

[looser38]

Not going to hold my breath, we've heard this before.

Nor will I, but I will maintain hope.

 

[frenchman]

The only thing I want to read from them is a eulogy for RBG, and welcoming Trey Gowdy as the new justice.

 

[MaverickNH]

Everyone should read this:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-1272/94861/20190401112107899_Gould%20Petition.pdf

Excellent writing.

Yes, a useful read, thanks. Not the meat of historical analysis and evidence that’s fun and educational, but how rulings since Heller and McDonald tie together for SCOTUS to consider. If granted, we will see plenty of got amicus briefs worth reading too.

 

[Dennis in MA]

Oh, and a close tie-for-first, first-second, I guess, would be the yet-published petition to tell the ATF to collect their tax and STFU. It's not a suitability restriction, it's a tax. Pay the tax, get the stamp (like a duck stamp or a postage stamp) and pick up your item. Period. End of problems.