RonOglesby - Now in Texas Posted December 6, 2019 at 06:09 PM Share Posted December 6, 2019 at 06:09 PM Audio of orals now posted:https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2019/18-280 enjoy the moot arguments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Nichols Posted December 9, 2019 at 04:57 AM Share Posted December 9, 2019 at 04:57 AM Audio and scrolling video of the transcript highlighted in yellow in synch with the audio thanks to Project Oyez! https://youtu.be/Uok_kvE8tRE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chislinger Posted December 19, 2019 at 04:40 AM Share Posted December 19, 2019 at 04:40 AM So at this point no news is good news? Surely they wouldn't wait until June if they were going to rule it moot and we'd hear that sooner than later? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted December 19, 2019 at 04:46 AM Share Posted December 19, 2019 at 04:46 AM Their next conference is Jan 10. I wouldn't expect anything before then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Nichols Posted December 19, 2019 at 11:22 AM Share Posted December 19, 2019 at 11:22 AM So at this point no news is good news? Surely they wouldn't wait until June if they were going to rule it moot and we'd hear that sooner than later?At this point, no news is no news, and nothing else. Here is a link to a well-written article on mootness and the NYSRPA v. NYC oral argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmagloo Posted December 19, 2019 at 05:09 PM Share Posted December 19, 2019 at 05:09 PM .... Chief Justice Roberts led the charge? Ahem... Imho, if the new law they enacted to undermine the lawsuit still infringes on our 2A rights, which it does, they have an obligation to right this wrong. This business about allowing the state to reset and kick the can, forcing a new lawsuit to determine the constitutionality of the new law is crazy. This entire logic of allowing government to infringe on Constitutional Rights, with clearly bad and onerous laws, for years and decades as it works it's way through the courts is a complete and utter travesty. Our forefathers never anticipated a court system that allowed cases to stall for a decade or more, while the harm continues. I'm sure they also didn't anticipate murders going through years, and years through countless appeals and millions of dollars of tax payers money for smoking gun cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
press1280 Posted December 21, 2019 at 12:48 PM Share Posted December 21, 2019 at 12:48 PM So at this point no news is good news? Surely they wouldn't wait until June if they were going to rule it moot and we'd hear that sooner than later?I'd agree with this. I doubt they hold a mootness ruling until June. A wild guess on my part (if they rule it's moot and there's dissents) might be it comes in February or March.In the meantime I don't expect any of the held cases to do anything until then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richrude Posted January 24, 2020 at 04:48 AM Share Posted January 24, 2020 at 04:48 AM Anyone know why transcript and audio are not listed on SCOTUS web site Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted April 16, 2020 at 10:50 AM Share Posted April 16, 2020 at 10:50 AM Anyone know why transcript and audio are not listed on SCOTUS web site I'm not sure if this question is still live, but audio (various formats) and transcript (pdf) are available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted April 16, 2020 at 11:13 AM Share Posted April 16, 2020 at 11:13 AM A retired anti-2A judge bemoans the upcoming decision at AlterNet. The Supreme Court is poised to extend gun rights at the worst possible time April 8, 2020 ... In December's oral arguments, the city again asked the court to moot the case. The city made no attempt to defend the transportation ban. Unfortunately, given the city's capitulation and the Supreme Court's right-wing orientation, the only real remaining question is the scope of the NRA's inevitable victory. Even if the court reconsiders the city's request and enters a dismissal order, the NRA will walk away with a significant win, having forced the city to rescind one of the most stringent gun-control laws in the country. On the other hand, a decision on the merits on constitutional grounds in the NRA's favor would reward the organization with an even bigger triumph, endangering gun-control laws everywhere. A nation awash in firearms in the grip of the COVID-19 pandemic awaits the court's decision, which is expected by the end of June. ... This is not an NRA case. The NRA did file an amicus brief, but so did everybody else on the planet, it seems. The NYSRPA did this one solo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiet Observer Posted April 16, 2020 at 04:57 PM Share Posted April 16, 2020 at 04:57 PM I think that the left blames the NRA for any thing connected to gun rights. Hopefully his prediction will come true and a favorable 2A decision will have nationwide effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
civilone Posted April 17, 2020 at 01:17 PM Share Posted April 17, 2020 at 01:17 PM What I have found interesting is the assertion that NRA is the bad guy; it puts an easily targettable face on the 2nd Amendment. Conversely, in a conversation with an anti-2nd Amendment person if they make the point that it is the NRA pushing all this gun stuff, I make the point that the 2nd Amendment has little to do with the NRA. The 2nd Amendment is a God given right for Americans to protect ourselves, hunt, act as a check on the government at all levels, etc. As far as I am concerned I do not need the NRA at all for the 2nd Amendment, although I do support them. There is usually a glazing of the anti-2nd Amendment person's eyes when presented this way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Druid Posted April 27, 2020 at 02:53 PM Share Posted April 27, 2020 at 02:53 PM They ruled the case MOOT. petitioners’ claim for injunctive relief against New York City’s old rule is moot and that petitioners’ new claims should be addressed as appropriate in the first instance by the Court of Appeals and the District Court on remand. But said they should grant cert and handle these issues in another pending case: some federal and state courts may not be properly applying Heller and McDonald. The Court should address that issue soon, perhaps in one of the several Second Amendment cases with petitions for certiorari now pending before the Court. Full Opinion:https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-280_ba7d.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8x57 Posted April 27, 2020 at 04:00 PM Share Posted April 27, 2020 at 04:00 PM This was somewhat expected. The question now is what will happen to the several 2nd amendment cert petitions they've been holding for the last year. Now that NYSRPA is done, we'll finally get to see what SCOTUS has in mind those cases. Just reading the NYSRPA opinion it's easy to see that Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh want to hear another 2A case, and it only takes 4 votes to grant cert.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted April 27, 2020 at 04:23 PM Share Posted April 27, 2020 at 04:23 PM Kavanaugh basically signaled that they’ll hear some of the pending cases. There’s stronger ones than the NY one anyways Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangerdeepv Posted April 27, 2020 at 04:25 PM Share Posted April 27, 2020 at 04:25 PM In other words...........punted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybermgk Posted April 27, 2020 at 06:21 PM Share Posted April 27, 2020 at 06:21 PM They ruled the case MOOT. petitioners’ claim for injunctive relief against New York City’s old rule is moot and that petitioners’ new claims should be addressed as appropriate in the first instance by the Court of Appeals and the District Court on remand. But said they should grant cert and handle these issues in another pending case: some federal and state courts may not be properly applying Heller and McDonald. The Court should address that issue soon, perhaps in one of the several Second Amendment cases with petitions for certiorari now pending before the Court. Full Opinion:https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-280_ba7d.pdf"some federal and state courts may not be properly applying Heller and McDonald. The 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 is far more important, for us all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mab22 Posted April 27, 2020 at 06:29 PM Share Posted April 27, 2020 at 06:29 PM So now states can enact these unfair laws and when it goes to the SCOTUS, they just make modify it wasting the defense's resources into oblivion.Death by a thousands of paper cuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davel501 Posted April 27, 2020 at 07:30 PM Share Posted April 27, 2020 at 07:30 PM I'm reading the decision as they did not dismiss it, rather they remanded it to the lower court to look at the case again in light of the changes to the laws with a warning from 4 justices that they are not looking at Heller the right way. This very case could be back before the court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoRonin70 Posted April 27, 2020 at 11:22 PM Author Share Posted April 27, 2020 at 11:22 PM So, unless one of the other cases that have been held pending this decision is ruled in favor of the Second Amendment, this was pretty much a wash that forced New York to make changes only to avoid a decision on Constitutional grounds because they knew their law wouldn't fly. Thus, by doing so, they were allowed to commit malfeasance and violate the civil rights of citizens without any real penalty. This is a real Reginald J. Shatbox development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
press1280 Posted April 28, 2020 at 12:25 PM Share Posted April 28, 2020 at 12:25 PM I'm reading the decision as they did not dismiss it, rather they remanded it to the lower court to look at the case again in light of the changes to the laws with a warning from 4 justices that they are not looking at Heller the right way. This very case could be back before the court.It looks like it's back to the appeals court but only to address any damages issue. The case as it relates to the 2A seems to be over.All other held 2A cases are heading back to conference this Friday...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Druid Posted April 28, 2020 at 01:25 PM Share Posted April 28, 2020 at 01:25 PM Interesting. At least SCOTUS has decided to move quickly to vote on which other 2A case they would rather have. Any predictions on which of these they may choose Friday? These are all on their calendar for that day.Monday would be the day they announce the result. Mance v. BarrPena v. HoranRogers v. GrewalGould v. LipsonCiolek v. New JerseyCheeseman v. PolilloWorman v. HealeyMalpasso v. PallozziCulp v. RaoulWilson v. Cook County Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davel501 Posted April 28, 2020 at 03:07 PM Share Posted April 28, 2020 at 03:07 PM I'm reading the decision as they did not dismiss it, rather they remanded it to the lower court to look at the case again in light of the changes to the laws with a warning from 4 justices that they are not looking at Heller the right way. This very case could be back before the court. It looks like it's back to the appeals court but only to address any damages issue. The case as it relates to the 2A seems to be over.All other held 2A cases are heading back to conference this Friday......I read to address additional claims as well as damages because they have not resolved all of the original infringement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobPistol Posted April 28, 2020 at 05:36 PM Share Posted April 28, 2020 at 05:36 PM I'm disappointed but not really surprised. Real human rights don't take a step forward day after day, unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
press1280 Posted April 28, 2020 at 05:53 PM Share Posted April 28, 2020 at 05:53 PM Interesting. At least SCOTUS has decided to move quickly to vote on which other 2A case they would rather have. Any predictions on which of these they may choose Friday? These are all on their calendar for that day.Monday would be the day they announce the result. Mance v. BarrPena v. HoranRogers v. GrewalGould v. LipsonCiolek v. New JerseyCheeseman v. PolilloWorman v. HealeyMalpasso v. PallozziCulp v. RaoulWilson v. Cook County Normal practice would be to take a may-issue permit case since there's a clear circuit split. But since they initially took this case (no split) I'm looking more to low hanging fruit and a law that even the most ardent antis will have a hard time defending and no one will miss. My vote is Pena v. Horan. I think it may take a few conferences though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted April 29, 2020 at 05:04 AM Share Posted April 29, 2020 at 05:04 AM I'm reading the decision as they did not dismiss it, rather they remanded it to the lower court to look at the case again in light of the changes to the laws with a warning from 4 justices that they are not looking at Heller the right way. This very case could be back before the court. That is what I'm seeing as well, even without a 'win' ruling the Supreme court just put the lower courts on notice that they best stop ignoring Heller as they very well are about to send a stronger message. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fxdpntc Posted April 29, 2020 at 02:58 PM Share Posted April 29, 2020 at 02:58 PM I'm reading the decision as they did not dismiss it, rather they remanded it to the lower court to look at the case again in light of the changes to the laws with a warning from 4 justices that they are not looking at Heller the right way. This very case could be back before the court. the Supreme court just put the lower courts on notice that they best stop ignoring Heller as they very well are about to send a stronger message. A back handed way of affirming Shepard/Moore v Madigan, since Posner obviously DID NOT ignore Heller in his decision? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweeper13 Posted April 29, 2020 at 05:26 PM Share Posted April 29, 2020 at 05:26 PM Article from Fox news, on Alitos dissent. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/alito-dissent-gun-supreme-court Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
press1280 Posted April 30, 2020 at 04:46 PM Share Posted April 30, 2020 at 04:46 PM https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-824/142651/20200429142838818_18-824%202020-04-29%20Rogers%20supplemental%20brief%20FINAL.pdf Supplemental brief filed in the Rogers case (NJ may-issue). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoRonin70 Posted April 30, 2020 at 05:34 PM Author Share Posted April 30, 2020 at 05:34 PM https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-824/142651/20200429142838818_18-824%202020-04-29%20Rogers%20supplemental%20brief%20FINAL.pdf Supplemental brief filed in the Rogers case (NJ may-issue). Does this mean what I think it does . . . New Jersey’s law cannot be squared with the text, history, or tradition of the Second Amendment, and this case provides an ideal vehicle for this Court to develop its Second Amendment law and correct the mistaken approach of the Third Circuit and other courts in applying watered-down scrutiny and effectively rendering the Second Amendment a homebound right. . . . because if it does, it looks like anti-civil-rights clowns might be getting set to be taken out to the forest preserves and made to duck-walk pantsless while someone with wingtips follows along behind them kicking them up where the sun don't shine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.