• 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.

SCOTUS’s New 2A Case, to address nullification of the Right to Arms. Dave Kopel at Volokh Conspiracy

Doug_Nightmare

Active member
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
317
http://reason.com/volokh/2019/01/22/supreme-courts-new-second-amendment-case
“For the first time in nearly a decade, the Supreme Court has voted to hear argument in a Second Amendment case. Although the schedule has not been set, oral argument in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York, New York could take place this Spring. The case presents the Supreme Court with the opportunity to address an eccentric and abusive New York law, and, more broadly, to begin reining in lower court nullification of the Supreme Court's precedents in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago.
[ ... ]”
 

CJ4wd

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2017
Messages
206
Location
Planet Earth
From what I have read elsewhere, this may not do much for us in that it looking more at "transportation restrictions" and the nibbling away of gun rights. With the restrictions NY is trying to impose, you could get in so much trouble just for changing your route to the gun range. These are absolutely ludicrous ideas, not surprising from NY.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
http://reason.com/volokh/2019/01/22/supreme-courts-new-second-amendment-case
“For the first time in nearly a decade, the Supreme Court has voted to hear argument in a Second Amendment case. Although the schedule has not been set, oral argument in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York, New York could take place this Spring. The case presents the Supreme Court with the opportunity to address an eccentric and abusive New York law, and, more broadly, to begin reining in lower court nullification of the Supreme Court's precedents in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago.
[ ... ]”
SCOTUS has not held lower courts accountable for not abiding by SCOTUS rulings....SCOTUS will not take advantage of this opportunity.
What are the chances $58 Million Americans (a buck apiece) could launch a class-action lawsuit against the U.S. Supreme Court for their complete and utter failure to enforce "the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED?"
 

357SigFan

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2007
Messages
148
Location
STL MO, USA
What are the chances $58 Million Americans (a buck apiece) could launch a class-action lawsuit against the U.S. Supreme Court for their complete and utter failure to enforce "the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED?"
I've said it before... if every gun owner in the country (Let's assume your 58 million number, although I think estimates are more like 80 mil) gave $100 to hire the absolute best of the best lawyers in the country to bring an absolute, all-out full court press to the supreme court and fight until we won, that would be $5.8 BILLION. Personally, I would give $100 EVERY YEAR for that kind of offense for as long as the fight was on and it was needed. Unfortunately, the fight our 'pro gun' organizations bring to the table is... rather limp... Pretty much with the goal in mind to keep the status quo, and maybe throw us a bone every now and then. Lets face it - with that kind of 'attack' on the SC and gov, if/when we won, the 'pro gun' organizations would be mostly obsolete.
 

The Big Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,962
Location
Waco, TX
The best we can do at this point is to donate to the 2nd Amendment Foundation. They bring action after action in defense of our right to bear arms. Next is to push the President and your Senators to only nominate and confirm pro 2nd Amendment judges.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
Unfortunately, the fight our 'pro gun' organizations bring to the table is... rather limp... Pretty much with the goal in mind to keep the status quo, and maybe throw us a bone every now and then. Lets face it - with that kind of 'attack' on the SC and gov, if/when we won, the 'pro gun' organizations would be mostly obsolete.
Agreed. Winning is contrary to their long-term self-preservation. Maintaining conflict is what the NRA and the others use to keep the money rolling in.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,736
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
This thread has not been updated in a while. The subject case was accepted, and is scheduled to be heard in the Fall term. In the mean time, the City of New York, along with pretty much ALL the other gun-hate organizations, have read the writing on the wall with this one, and have been desperately trying to scuttle the case ever since it was taken. (I have no examples to cite, but there have been several instances of the gun-crazies publishing blogs, articles, tweets, etc, literally BEGGING NYC to repeal their ordinance so that SCOTUS does not hear it and kill it. That alone should confirm that the ramifications of this case are much greater than just the scope of this particular ordinance.)

In the past few weeks, NYC has radically amended their ordinance in an effort to make the case "moot," taking away the premise that the plaintiff is using to bring the case in the first place - basically, no more injury to the plaintiff, no more case before SCOTUS. Today, they filed a motion formally asking the Supreme Court to dismiss the case.

Of course, nobody knows for sure what they will do, but I have read other analysis that describes well established precedent that recognizes such manipulative shenanigans, and allows them to continue the case based on the principle involved, even if the actual laws have been repealed. Let's hope that happens here.

Link to the motion can be found in this tweet by SCOTUS reporter Amy Howe:


TFred
 
Top