• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Court tosses NY case that could have expanded gun rights

Joined
Jul 6, 2019
Messages
178
Likes
164
Location
Idahoosach, MA
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court sidestepped a major decision on gun rights Monday in a dispute over New York City’s former ban on transporting guns.

The justices threw out a challenge from gun rights groups, including the National Rifle Association’s New York affiliate. The court ruled that the city’s move to ease restrictions on taking licensed, locked and unloaded guns outside the city limits, coupled with a change in state law to prevent New York from reviving the ban, left the court with nothing to decide. The court asked a lower court to consider whether the city’s new rules still pose problems for gun owners.

The anti-climactic end to the Supreme Court case is a disappointment to gun rights advocates and relief to gun control groups who thought a conservative Supreme Court majority fortified by two appointees of President Donald Trump, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, might use the case to expand on landmark decisions from a decade ago that established a right under the Second Amendment to keep a gun at home for self-defense.

But other guns cases remain in the high court’s pipeline and the justices could decide to hear one or more of those next term.

Although the opinion was unsigned, the court was split, 6-3, over the outcome.

Gorsuch joined Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas in dissenting from the dismissal. Kavanaugh wrote a brief concurring opinion in which he agreed with the result, but also said the court should take up another guns case soon.

“This case is not moot. The City violated petitioners’ Second Amendment right, and we should so hold,” Alito wrote for the dissenters.

Lower courts upheld the regulation, but the Supreme Court’s decision early in 2019 to step into the case signaled a revived interest in gun rights from a court with two new justices.

Officials at both the city and state level scrambled to find a way to remove the case from the justices’ grasp. Not only did the city change its regulation to allow licensed gun owners to transport their weapons to locations outside New York’s five boroughs, but the state enacted a law barring cities from imposing the challenged restrictions.

Those moves failed to get the court to dismiss the case before arguments in December, and gun control advocates worried that the court might adopt the reasoning Kavanaugh used in a 2011 opinion in his former job as a Court of Appeals judge. There, he wrote, gun laws “that are not longstanding or sufficiently rooted in text, history, and tradition are not consistent with the Second Amendment individual right.”

Restrictions on who can carry guns in public, limits on large-capacity ammunition magazines and perhaps even restrictions on gun ownership by convicted criminals, including people convicted of domestic violence, might be imperiled, gun control groups said.

Those groups breathed a sigh of relief Monday. “The Supreme Court declined the invitation to adopt the NRA’s extreme and dangerous interpretation of the Second Amendment,” said Eric Tirschwell, managing director of Everytown Law, the legal arm of Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund.

But similar issues could be back before the court soon, Kavanaugh wrote. He joined Alito in voicing concern that lower federal courts are not properly applying the court’s two big gun rights decisions.

“The Court should address that issue soon, perhaps in one of the several Second Amendment cases” pending at the Supreme Court, he wrote.
 

We have an entire thread on SCOTUS decisions/actions/etc. this decision was posted earlier this morning.

DUPE
 
It would be interesting if there was a amicus brief on the judicial proceedings behind a dismissal. Normally a case that makes it to the USSC doesn't get dismissed because 'someone signed it in crayon' (if you know what I mean). So the brief or decision must have had some more pertinent basis on the ruling. I'm not holding my breath for the USSC to uphold MY rights... I have this thing called The Bill of Rights... *sigh*
 
Kavanaugh sided with Robert's and the libs, but he did agree with Alito's disent that lower courts are not following Heller and Mcdonald. He noted a 2nd amendment case should be heard soon, which makes 4 justices who agree that a stronger 2a case should be brought up which I believe is all that is needed to get a case in front of the court..then you just need Roberts not to screw us when deciding the case.....
 
Wasn't that the thinking by some here? that they would sidestep this case and possibly pick up an AWB case?
If I understand the gist of it, this case was supposed to change scrutiny for all gun related cases, which then would have led to eventual SCOTUS reviews of many facets of 2A rights, included AWB, mag capacity laws, carry laws, etc.

This was probably the one case to rule them all, but SCOTUS just took it and threw it into the fires of Mt. Doom.
 
I was going to say there's a thread just for this case, adding to it makes a ton of sense
Found it:

This seems like the right thread to merge with (if we can all agree to be grownups and ignore the flailing on pages 11&12)
 
If I understand the gist of it, this case was supposed to change scrutiny for all gun related cases, which then would have led to eventual SCOTUS reviews of many facets of 2A rights, included AWB, mag capacity laws, carry laws, etc.

This was probably the one case to rule them all, but SCOTUS just took it and threw it into the fires of Mt. Doom.

I dont agree with that ( I am an idiot though) if you look at any 2a case in existence every single one of them could be used by the Supreme Court to deal with levels of scrutiny because every one of them uses the level of scrutiny to deny 2a rights. The Worman case is a great example of the abuse of levels of scrutiny that the supreme court could take up at any point and make ar15's protected arms AND sh@t all over the levels of scrutiny these courts are using all in one swoop. I looked at the NY case as more of being able to carry outside the home and I dont think the court wanted to go down that road yet with the makeup of the court so I'm not too suprised I guess
 
Well that's depressing .
Nice to know that all the folks that fought hard for Kavanaugh got rewarded with good decisions .
Tool.
 
Well that's depressing .
Nice to know that all the folks that fought hard for Kavanaugh got rewarded with good decisions .
Tool.
"
But similar issues could be back before the court soon, Kavanaugh wrote. He joined Alito in voicing concern that lower federal courts are not properly applying the court’s two big gun rights decisions.

“The Court should address that issue soon, perhaps in one of the several Second Amendment cases” pending at the Supreme Court, he wrote."
I think he's waiting for a better case.
 
This is a major piece of breaking news. I’m ok that it isn’t buried at the end of a thread that is mostly lacking new info. I wish Ihad a neg rep button for the dupe police.
The more light the better ! It’s Roberts that we need to worry about ! He gets in under the guise of a conservative judge and flips like that Deuche Souter !
 
"
But similar issues could be back before the court soon, Kavanaugh wrote. He joined Alito in voicing concern that lower federal courts are not properly applying the court’s two big gun rights decisions.

“The Court should address that issue soon, perhaps in one of the several Second Amendment cases” pending at the Supreme Court, he wrote."
I think he's waiting for a better case.

Yes. One that doesnt have all of NY shit baggage.
 
"
But similar issues could be back before the court soon, Kavanaugh wrote. He joined Alito in voicing concern that lower federal courts are not properly applying the court’s two big gun rights decisions.

“The Court should address that issue soon, perhaps in one of the several Second Amendment cases” pending at the Supreme Court, he wrote."
I think he's waiting for a better case.

The SCOTUS is always looking for the next opportunity to say they'll get it soon. SOON!

"I swear, Charlie Brown, I'll hold the football THIS time!"
 
If I understand the gist of it, this case was supposed to change scrutiny for all gun related cases, which then would have led to eventual SCOTUS reviews of many facets of 2A rights, included AWB, mag capacity laws, carry laws, etc.

This was probably the one case to rule them all, but SCOTUS just took it and threw it into the fires of Mt. Doom.

I could have sworn that was the MA case against Healey. Stating that the one of the major arguments filed said that by sheer numbers of so called “assault weapons” owned made them common use, and that further more, “high capacity” magazines were under the same scrutiny because of the numbers owned (over 100 million) and that considered them common usage and therefore a ban was unconstitutional.

I can’t recall the article that talked about that brief or writ or what ever it is that had that argument. I think it may have been the FPC.
 
Anyone who casually says that we will “win it in the courts” doesn’t understand how difficult that really is.
 
Back
Top Bottom