• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Powell v. Tompkins Rises from the Dead (SCOTUS carry case) 15-6063

California Right To Carry

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
462
Location
United States
This is a Second & 14th Amendment carry case out of Massachusetts. It is not a concealed carry case.

A cert petition was filed with the US Supreme Court on September 9, 2015.

The cert petition is very well written. Importantly, it clearly identifies the existing circuit splits on whether or not the Second Amendment extends beyond the home. As you may recall, the dissent in Jackson v. San Francisco by Justice Thomas (Justice Scalia concurring) chided the court in that case for not granting that cert petition for lack of a circuit split. Another nice thing about the cert petition in this case is the outcome does not turn on whether or not there is a right to carry a handgun concealed in public. The question is whether or not there is a right to possess and carry in public pursuant to the Second Amendment (the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals and the Massachusetts high court said there is not). On November 5, 2015 SCOTUS requested a response. This moves the cert petition from DOA to a better than average chance that the cert petition will be granted. There are two types of cases which are normally placed on the “dead list” and denied outright. IFP cases (those filed by persons who are so poor they cannot afford to pay the filing fee) and cases where a waiver of response is filed and SCOTUS does not request a response. This is an IFP case and a waiver of response had been filed. Now that SCOTUS has requested a response this case is off the “dead list.”

I maintain a tabbed page at my website for this case and will update it with the response (brief in opposition) and the reply to the response when I get them, as well as any Amicus briefs which are filed -> http://blog.californiarighttocarry.org/?page_id=3479
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
I am unconcerned with any government official talking, discussing, or "deciding" an aspect of any of my natural rights. You should be too.
 
Last edited:

Statkowski

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
1,141
Location
Cherry Tree (Indiana County), Pennsylvania, USA
The cert raises two excellent questions:

Does the right to own and carry (a/k/a keep and bear) arms apply outside of one's home?

Can states require that lawful carry be a defense rather than unlawful carry being the offense?

Answers to both questions can be applied across the board to numerous state laws.
 

California Right To Carry

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
462
Location
United States
Brief in Opposition Filed

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – February 9, 2016 The Brief in Opposition was filed and is available here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
I am unconcerned with any government official talking, discussing, or "deciding" an aspect of any of my natural rights. You should be too.

That's a shame you are not concerned with things that absolutely do affect you.

Regardless of the efficacy of your natural rights, if you allow those who have the means to trample on them to enact and enforce laws that increase their ability to trample on them, then you get trampled on.

It's far smarter, safer, and cheaper, to fight these issues beforehand rather waiting until they rear their ugly heads on the street.

Do you even vote? Or do you similarly assume that your natural rights override the taxman's knock on your door? Even if you live in the national forest in a cabin built by primitive means, if you've ever bought anything in a store, paid for a laptop or Internet service, or pumped gas, you're still paying taxes.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,936
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
That's a shame you are not concerned with things that absolutely do affect you.

Regardless of the efficacy of your natural rights, if you allow those who have the means to trample on them to enact and enforce laws that increase their ability to trample on them, then you get trampled on.

It's far smarter, safer, and cheaper, to fight these issues beforehand rather waiting until they rear their ugly heads on the street.

Do you even vote? Or do you similarly assume that your natural rights override the taxman's knock on your door? Even if you live in the national forest in a cabin built by primitive means, if you've ever bought anything in a store, paid for a laptop or Internet service, or pumped gas, you're still paying taxes.
In that davidmcbeth has been banned I doubt you will get an answer.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,936
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
That's a shame you are not concerned with things that absolutely do affect you.

Regardless of the efficacy of your natural rights, if you allow those who have the means to trample on them to enact and enforce laws that increase their ability to trample on them, then you get trampled on.

It's far smarter, safer, and cheaper, to fight these issues beforehand rather waiting until they rear their ugly heads on the street.

Do you even vote? Or do you similarly assume that your natural rights override the taxman's knock on your door? Even if you live in the national forest in a cabin built by primitive means, if you've ever bought anything in a store, paid for a laptop or Internet service, or pumped gas, you're still paying taxes
.
How taxes got involved I don't know, but it sounds like you are inferring that some taxes are unconstitutional. Would that be direct taxes, indirect taxes, excise taxes or income taxes? How about constitutional income taxes or statutory income taxes? Are fines, fees or penalties taxes. The USSC ruled penalties as being a tax thanks to Obama Care.

Are any of these taxes the same tax, but just called by another name? Does ex post facto law apply to taxes?

Is render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's effect your rights or only apply to taxes?

I could keep going, but I hope you get the point.
 

California Right To Carry

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
462
Location
United States
Powell v. Tompkins cert petition was denied on 3-21-2016

Not much else to say other than the denial of cert was without comment and Massachusetts had filed a Brief in Opposition to the granting of cert which extensively argued that this really wasn't a Second Amendment case.

We'll never know why the cert petition was denied other than the obvious reasons that 1) Four justices did not vote to hear the case and 2) there wasn't a single justice willing to relist the case.
 
Top