New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn v. Bruen Oral Arguments Nov 3rd, 10am

[Hoover]

arguments live at 10 am tomorrow November 3, 2021

Supreme Court Strikes Down New York Concealed Gun Law in 6-3 Opinion

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in [New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen], a case on gun rights that challenges New York law requiring a person show cause in order to be approved for a license to carry a gun outside of their home. The Court on June 23, 2022, in a 6-3...

www.c-span.org

 

[Dennis in MA]

No they're not.

Yes they are!

Nuh uh!

UH HUH!

Sorry - just practicing my argumenting.

 

[Mesatchornug]

Is this not a continuation of this thread?

Supreme Court - NYSRPA v. Bruen - Megathread

Today, the court vindicated LKB’s prognostication powers, granting cert to New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. City of New York, a case that challenges the city’s prohibition on transporting licensed, locked and unloaded handguns outside the city. While ruling the law...

www.northeastshooters.com

 

[Ken S]

will a win in this case mean they will have to issue non resident permits without the requirement of being a property owner?

 

[Hoover]

Is this not a continuation of this thread?

Supreme Court - NYSRPA v. Bruen - Megathread

Today, the court vindicated LKB’s prognostication powers, granting cert to New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. City of New York, a case that challenges the city’s prohibition on transporting licensed, locked and unloaded handguns outside the city. While ruling the law...

www.northeastshooters.com

I wanted to post a clean thread with the link to the oral arguments in the lead post. The OP of the other hasn’t been on for a week so he wouldn’t have added it.

 

[paul73]

No they're not.

Yes they are!

Nuh uh!

UH HUH!

Sorry - just practicing my argumenting.

hecklers cry - INSURRECTORS!!!!
then FBI arrests all and sends them to gitmo.

 

[Hoover]

will a win in this case mean they will have to issue non resident permits without the requirement of being a property owner?

the best decision for gun owners and people who love the constitution would be for them to strike down NYCs law and instruct lower courts to look at text, history, tradition and not balancing interests. The lower courts have been allowed to invent their own standards, a good ruling ends that practice

 

[Hoover]

hecklers cry - INSURRECTORS!!!!
then FBI arrests all and sends them to gitmo.

there are several briefs including one from dem senators and congressmen to keep the law because without laws like that January 6th could have been more deadly. Laughable

 

[Hoover]

Hearing lies live now.

Supreme Court Strikes Down New York Concealed Gun Law in 6-3 Opinion

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in [New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen], a case on gun rights that challenges New York law requiring a person show cause in order to be approved for a license to carry a gun outside of their home. The Court on June 23, 2022, in a 6-3...

www.c-span.org

 

[paul73]

there are several briefs including one from dem senators and congressmen to keep the law because without laws like that January 6th could have been more deadly. Laughable

it is not a 'law' when people are getting thrown to jail by secret services and kept in jail with no sentence. or when firearms are robbed by police based on an anonymous snitch.
there are proper names for that all but it ain`t 'law' in any of those names.

 

[web_dev]

will a win in this case mean they will have to issue non resident permits without the requirement of being a property owner?

I would think so, for MA, because there is a non-resident application available. NY doesn't allow non-residents without property to apply for a pistol permit at all, and the question presented in this lawsuit is about the denial of concealed carry permit applications. I think it would take a separate lawsuit to mandate that states open up applications to non-residents.

 

[ridleyman]

will a win in this case mean they will have to issue non resident permits without the requirement of being a property owner?

It means you'll be able to carry a loaded AR w/30 rd mag down Broadway!

 

[Hoover]

It means you'll be able to carry a loaded AR w/30 rd mag down Broadway!

there’s a mag limit case from NJ pending cert SCOTUS hasn’t denied or accepted yet, they seem to be holding it in que for whatever reason (hopefully because they want to accept that case next). So maybe 30 rd mags on Broadway will be in the near future

if SCOTUS strikes down this NY law, lefty’s will lose it but if they dispatch mag limits in an upcoming case lefty’s will go hyper insane. I think they’re slightly more nutty over mag limits than MSRs

 

[ridleyman]

there’s a mag limit case from NJ pending cert SCOTUS hasn’t denied or accepted yet, they seem to be holding it in que for whatever reason (hopefully because they want to accept that case next). So maybe 30 rd mags on Broadway will be in the near future

if SCOTUS strikes down this NY law, lefty’s will lose it but if they dispatch mag limits in an upcoming case lefty’s will go hyper insane. I think they’re slightly more nutty over mag limits than MSRs

Hard to tell, as they're so fuquing emotionally distraught about pretty much everything.

 

[Waher]

there’s a mag limit case from NJ pending cert SCOTUS hasn’t denied or accepted yet, they seem to be holding it in que for whatever reason (hopefully because they want to accept that case next). So maybe 30 rd mags on Broadway will be in the near future

if SCOTUS strikes down this NY law, lefty’s will lose it but if they dispatch mag limits in an upcoming case lefty’s will go hyper insane. I think they’re slightly more nutty over mag limits than MSRs

The way that case has sat on the runway leads me to believe whichever Justice is keeping it there wants to see the outcome of the NY case. This could be good or bad depending on which outcome the Justice is waiting to confirm.

 

[Hoover]

The way that case has sat on the runway leads me to believe whichever Justice is keeping it there wants to see the outcome of the NY case. This could be good or bad depending on which outcome the Justice is waiting to confirm.

With the current make up of the court and that the 3rd circuit upheld the mag there’s no way Lagan the “wise” Latina or Breyer wants any gun case. The most pro 2A on the court are definitely Thomas and Alito, gorsuch is up there though and kavanaugh voted to strike down a AWB. I definitely think they’ll take up more gun cases in the next few sessions, they’ll have the 4 votes to accept cases. And Alito and Thomas in particular haven’t been pleased with the lack of action and allowing lower courts to go rogue.

We’ll definitely see mag limits, AWB, non violent lifetime prohibition of owning guns, etc. I think they’ll allow regulations but blanket bans won’t fly. So if MA were to require special registration for AWs, SCOTUS probably wouldn’t hear a case, but a ban wouldn’t fly with the current court. Time will tell.

 

[71montess]

With the current make up of the court and that the 3rd circuit upheld the mag there’s no way Lagan the “wise” Latina or Breyer wants any gun case. The most pro 2A on the court are definitely Thomas and Alito, gorsuch is up there though and kavanaugh voted to strike down a AWB. I definitely think they’ll take up more gun cases in the next few sessions, they’ll have the 4 votes to accept cases. And Alito and Thomas in particular haven’t been pleased with the lack of action and allowing lower courts to go rogue.

We’ll definitely see mag limits, AWB, non violent lifetime prohibition of owning guns, etc. I think they’ll allow regulations but blanket bans won’t fly. So if MA were to require special registration for AWs, SCOTUS probably wouldn’t hear a case, but a ban wouldn’t fly with the current court. Time will tell.

It's not an AW. It's a semi auto rifle.

 

[Hoover]

It's not an AW. It's a semi auto rifle.

The laws in question uses the AW language, that’s what the discussion was about. Lighten up Francis

 

[71montess]

My name is not Francis.

The laws in question uses the AW language, that’s what the discussion was about. Lighten up Francis

 

[T-Unit]

With the current make up of the court and that the 3rd circuit upheld the mag there’s no way Lagan the “wise” Latina or Breyer wants any gun case. The most pro 2A on the court are definitely Thomas and Alito, gorsuch is up there though and kavanaugh voted to strike down a AWB. I definitely think they’ll take up more gun cases in the next few sessions, they’ll have the 4 votes to accept cases. And Alito and Thomas in particular haven’t been pleased with the lack of action and allowing lower courts to go rogue.

We’ll definitely see mag limits, AWB, non violent lifetime prohibition of owning guns, etc. I think they’ll allow regulations but blanket bans won’t fly. So if MA were to require special registration for AWs, SCOTUS probably wouldn’t hear a case, but a ban wouldn’t fly with the current court. Time will tell.

Trump's trio and really all the Right leaning justices on SCOTUS are terrified of the court being packed. I would not fool myself into believing AWB, mag capacities, and other "nuts and bolts" gun laws are going to even be heard by SCOTUS, let alone struck down. Further, the Supreme Court really has no enforcement mechanism as it's the executive branch that is given powers of enforcing laws and upholding the Constitution, thus an anti gun state can easily ignore the rulings and nothing will happen because a Democrat President now is an anti-Constitutionalist while a Republican President will be advised against using the power of the Federal gov't to enforce a pro gun SCOTUS ruling do to fears they'll look mean and be called a dictator for sending in National Guard against a state's wishes.

This is why any sort of pro gun ruling from SCOTUS from now until whenever our side that's full of lazy, cucked Christian cowards decides enough is enough and revolts, is going to be as narrow as possible. Just like how our gun rights were slowly chipped away starting with the NFA Act, the Supreme Court has to slowly chip away with the undoing of it all or else the Left is going to ignore it and really turn the country into a lawless nation on the brink of civil war.

 

[Hoover]

Trump's trio and really all the Right leaning justices on SCOTUS are terrified of the court being packed. I would not fool myself into believing AWB, mag capacities, and other "nuts and bolts" gun laws are going to even be heard by SCOTUS, let alone struck down. Further, the Supreme Court really has no enforcement mechanism as it's the executive branch that is given powers of enforcing laws and upholding the Constitution, thus an anti gun state can easily ignore the rulings and nothing will happen because a Democrat President now is an anti-Constitutionalist while a Republican President will be advised against using the power of the Federal gov't to enforce a pro gun SCOTUS ruling do to fears they'll look mean and be called a dictator for sending in National Guard against a state's wishes.

This is why any sort of pro gun ruling from SCOTUS from now until whenever our side that's full of lazy, cucked Christian cowards decides enough is enough and revolts, is going to be as narrow as possible. Just like how our gun rights were slowly chipped away starting with the NFA Act, the Supreme Court has to slowly chip away with the undoing of it all or else the Left is going to ignore it and really turn the country into a lawless nation on the brink of civil war.

The size of the court isn’t changing and the justices are not afraid of that issue. The dems would need to change the filibuster rules to even vote on changing the size of the court and there are less than 50 votes for that. They also don’t have 50 to change the size of the court.

SCOTUS has taken gun cases in 2 or the last 3 terms. They’ll take more in the upcoming terms.

 

[T-Unit]

The size of the court isn’t changing and the justices are not afraid of that issue. The dems would need to change the filibuster rules to even vote on changing the size of the court and there are less than 50 votes for that. They also don’t have 50 to change the size of the court.

SCOTUS has taken gun cases in 2 or the last 3 terms. They’ll take more in the upcoming terms.

Yeah, and they punted on the last one, which was the wrong decision and they know it.

Packing the court will be a concern from now on because the Progressives are power mad and if they can do it, they will do it.

A greater fear by the court is the potential of their rulings just being ignored and not enforced. When that happens (because it will) the entire judiciary fails to be a branch of government.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

will a win in this case mean they will have to issue non resident permits without the requirement of being a property owner?

No. But you'll likely have more ammunition to make that challenge.