Jump to content

2A carry case to be heard at US Supreme Court


Recommended Posts

From the Washington Post

 

"The Supreme Court announced Monday it will hear a major new gun control case next term, accepting a National Rifle Association-backed challenge that asks the court to declare there is a constitutional right to carry a weapon outside the home."

 

link

Edited by NRApistol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Supreme Court announced Monday that it will hear a major gun rights case over whether ordinary citizens can be legally prohibited from carrying concealed handguns for self-defense outside their homes.


The case, brought by the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, challenges a New York law that prohibits citizens from carrying a gun outside their home without a license that the state makes difficult to obtain.


Supreme Court to hear major gun rights appeal over carrying concealed handguns in public | Fox News


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btw, even though I made the comment regarding permits above, not to say that training is not important. In my opinion, if you are going to carry, it's definitely a good idea to get some training or at the very least spend a few hours at the range so you know how to shoot accurately and how your firearm works. I wish that Illinois weren't so annoying in regards to getting a ccw as far as cost, wait etc. My parents in Ohio got their ccw a while back and it only took I think a week and picking it up from the county sheriff.

 

As far as the case though, if they would rule favorably, then I guess we need them to look at magazine bans as to if they feel those are legal. I know how everyone here feels, but you know it's something that will be coming up considering congress these days.

Edited by illinois_buckeye
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not ... trusting ... Roberts & Barrett (and maybe Cavenaugh & Gorsuch) on this one! They won't hold that there is a constitutional right to carry outside the home. I predict a narrower ruling on the basis of a "right to apply for a CCL" and a violation of that right by the state by putting up unreasonable hurdles to citizens who apply. In other words, a right to carry outside the home subject to regulation by the states, to include licensure, limitations for "public safety," etc. I wanna believe that they'll interpret the 2A as written and declare it a Constitutional right to carry outside the home, but I think that based on their inaction over the election cases and the current climate, Roberts and Barrett will cave and go with the lefties, or force the real strict constructionists to join them in a watered-down holding per the above. Please God, let me wrong and of little faith!

Edited by 2A4Cook
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's face reality. The Supreme Court narrowed the question enough that they can decide only whether the plaintiffs rights were violated. Such a decision can give them relief without necessarily ruling on any particular scheme to regulate carry. If that is what happens, the ruling could have little or no impact on everyone else regardless of where you live. Only time will tell now. More importantly, will the state grant the plaintiffs the requested permits and moot the case once again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not ... trusting ... Roberts & Barrett (and maybe Cavenaugh & Gorsuch) on this one! They won't hold that there is a constitutional right to carry outside the home. I predict a narrower ruling on the basis of a "right to apply for a CCL" and a violation of that right by the state by putting up unreasonable hurdles to citizens who apply. In other words, a right to carry outside the home subject to regulation by the states, to include licensure, limitations for "public safety," etc. I wanna believe that they'll interpret the 2A as written and declare it a Constitutional right to carry outside the home, but I think that based on their inaction over the election cases and the current climate, Roberts and Barrett will cave and go with the lefties, or force the real strict constructionists to join them in a watered-down holding per the above. Please God, let me wrong and of little faith!

So basically what Heller did for handgun ownership. That would still be huge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The case isn't about the right to carr, per sey. It specifically goes after the question, whether NY's denial of permits because they have a 'proper cause' requirement violates the Constitution. I.E. NY says you can't have a CC license unless you show a proper need for it. GRANTED, if decided favorably for us, against NY, it can have a large impact on "May Issue" states, to some degree, from a little to a lot, depending on the State, their current laws and the decision.

Edited by cybermgk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is going to be interesting and probably have a huge effect either way. It is a real sad day when the highest court in the land is afraid of making a sound decision based on becoming 'packed'. I truly believe Manchin and Sinema are not the only Senators who are against packing any court. The left will have the advantage for a year until the tide turns rolls back out and takes many of their lefty heroes with it. But this case should only be the beginning of a 2A avalanche hopefully in our favor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is going to be interesting and probably have a huge effect either way. It is a real sad day when the highest court in the land is afraid of making a sound decision based on becoming 'packed'. I truly believe Manchin and Sinema are not the only Senators who are against packing any court. The left will have the advantage for a year until the tide turns rolls back out and takes many of their lefty heroes with it. But this case should only be the beginning of a 2A avalanche hopefully in our favor.

 

Says here there are more than Manchin and Sinema that are cool to the idea of court packing.

 

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2021/04/23/abandon-ship-dems-going-wobbly-on-normsshattering-courtpacking-scheme-n2588428

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I noted in another post, this is likely to be narrow.

 

A law blog I follow explains in some detail how the Court has already narrowed the issue considerably just by the way they frame the question.

 

The article I'm going to link to below describes in discouraging legal detail how this may not result in the nice crisp decision we all hope for, and notes in passing this may be the last chance we have with a nine person SC.

 

https://reason.com/volokh/2021/04/26/making-sense-of-the-limited-cert-grant-in-nys-rifle-pistol-association-v-corlett/

 

FWIW.

 

Rich Phillips

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is about New York specifically. I don’t think we are going to get open season carry, national reciprocity or anything that will help us with the FOID fiasco. They’re gonna tip toe through this one. If it was 6-3 left wing nuts on the court we’d never have gotten the two big wins a while ago. We’d be dealing with a right of the militia to bare arms because liberals are not scared their beliefs might upset millions. Conservatives have feet of clay on many issues, we see it all the time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The news about Senators not being on board with court packing is good. Also, this is out today.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/texas-gain-house-seats-new-york-california-losers

 

 

Keep in mind, the democrats only control the house by what about 7-8 seats? If the elections are anywhere near fair in 22, things could be looking up. Regardless if Republicans were to get the Senate, even if they got the house, they could Hamstring Biden/Harris. The only thing would be is whether or not people moving out of democratic states would leave their politics.

Edited by illinois_buckeye
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep in mind, the democrats only control the house by what about 7-8 seats? If the elections are anywhere near fair in 22, things could be looking up. Regardless if Republicans were to get the Senate, even if they got the house, they could Hamstring Biden/Harris. The only thing would be is whether or not people moving out of democratic states would leave their politics.

 

I believe the Democrats will lose the House and Senate in 22 and put an end to Biden/Harris goals at least in regards to legislative moves, the puppet will probably continue signing whatever EOs are put in front of him until his last day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The news about Senators not being on board with court packing is good. Also, this is out today.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/texas-gain-house-seats-new-york-california-losers

 

 

Keep in mind, the democrats only control the house by what about 7-8 seats? If the elections are anywhere near fair in 22, things could be looking up. Regardless if Republicans were to get the Senate, even if they got the house, they could Hamstring Biden/Harris. The only thing would be is whether or not people moving out of democratic states would leave their politics.

I have seen nothing that would make me believe that the cheaters and fraudsters have been arrested and put out of service! I expect them to double down on the cheating to try to keep their power and increase it. I sure hope and pray that I am right.

 

As far as the supreme court goes, it is a complete toss up what they will do! They appear to be running scared of the the liberals threats and might try to appease them. (which we all know you can not do). Will be interesting to see how it goes. If it goes our way, I expect a very narrow ruling that does not cover very much

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well you see right now Arizona is doing a forensic audit of the election. I think I heard New Hampshire was going to do a similar move. As a what if, what if these 2 areas complete the audits and find that the elections were very...inaccurate.

 

One could speculate that other states may begin checking and take steps to reform their elections going forward.

Edited by illinois_buckeye
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...