Supreme Court - NYSRPA v. Bruen - Megathread

Picton said:
I'm not optimistic, but the need for an injunction is laughably obvious under Bruen... which her own colleagues just decided. Perhaps she'll realize she needs to, you know, work with these people for the next thirty years? And that her first independent act on the Courtt ought not to be shitting all over their opinion?

Especially since this is bound to fall, anyway.
Click to expand...
Sotomayor?
She doesn't seem bothered by being incredibly outclassed by her colleagues so I doubt this equity hire will either
 
firearmslaw.duke.edu

Worrying Trends In the Lower Courts After Bruen | Duke Center for Firearms Law

firearmslaw.duke.edu firearmslaw.duke.edu

Codewords for maintaining existing and enacting new gun control in bold.

The authors worry that plaintiffs do not bear the burden of proving the 2ndA protects the weapons, places and people in question. But where else must a citizen prove to government that they are protected by a right? Are we guilty until we prove our innocence?

“There are several extremely worrying trends from what I’ve seen in the still nascent post-Bruen Second Amendment case law. These concerns don’t arise from disagreement with constitutional originalism or with the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Second Amendment. They are concerns about lower courts’ capacity (and perhaps willingness) to apply a historical method in a way that appropriately sets the boundaries around the state’s role in securing public safety given the individual’s right to keep and bear arms. Whatever one’s views of the ultimate issue in these cases, the lower courts’ muddied attempts to implement Bruen should be concerning.”
 
Last edited:
Again, let's go back to Civil Rights era of the 60's. These people couldn't understand (and as an aside - it's the SAME DAMNED PEOPLE!) how they world could just "change" around them and not allow their unconstitutional attacks on individuals.

It baffled them. They were aghast.

This is no different. The end is near (or is it the Sheriff?? I forget.) for them. They can't see it. All they can see is any legal or legislative wrangling to maintain control over something they have no control over and should never have had control over.

We shall overcoooooome. We shall overcoooooooome. We shall overcome tooooodayyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!
 
Streaming the 2022 Gun Rights Policy Conference
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-nHcdrASGA


A lot of Bruen & related content, as expected. Halbrook has a new book our shortly titled America’s Rifle - A Case for the AR15. The motive would be to assemble information for use in the many in “assault weapons" cases working their way through the courts.
 
42! said:
So for the program, do they provide the drugs or is it a bring your own sort of thing.... asking for a friend
Click to expand...
Cygnus Software had a drug testing policy of "We do not provide this benefit. Employees must arrange to have their drugs tested on their own" (or something very similar to that)
 
Coyote33 said:
Why do we only hear about these things AFTER THEY HAVE HAPPENED? Never saw anything about "Upcoming Gun Rights Policy Conference".
Click to expand...

www.saf.org

Second Amendment Foundation

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) is dedicated to promoting a better understanding about our Constitutional heritage to privately own and possess firearms. To that end, we carry on many educational and legal action programs designed to better inform the public about the gun control debate.
www.saf.org www.saf.org

You could always send them a $100 bucks to tell 'em you're sorry you missed it.

🐯
 
Mass-diver said:
The CT AWB lawsuit is going to be a big deal.
Click to expand...

Sure. For CT, NY and . . . . PA??? (I've forgotten). 2nd District. Not direct for mASS.

Besides, as if mASS would listen. Hell, NY won't listen if CT loses and the district ruling stands. "Sorry. Not for us. We've decided that up is down and left is right and lobster and shit sandwiches are interchangeable."

mASS will likely be right behind that as well. Frustratingly. We're gonna have to have either a SC ruling or a 1st district win. I'm still a patient man.

Coyote33 said:
Why do we only hear about these things AFTER THEY HAVE HAPPENED? Never saw anything about "Upcoming Gun Rights Policy Conference".
Click to expand...
Hey - in about 51 weeks, there's gonna be an upcoming gun rights policy conference.
 
Dennis in MA said:
Sure. For CT, NY and . . . . PA??? (I've forgotten). 2nd District. Not direct for mASS.

Besides, as if mASS would listen. Hell, NY won't listen if CT loses and the district ruling stands. "Sorry. Not for us. We've decided that up is down and left is right and lobster and shit sandwiches are interchangeable."

mASS will likely be right behind that as well. Frustratingly. We're gonna have to have either a SC ruling or a 1st district win. I'm still a patient man.


Hey - in about 51 weeks, there's gonna be an upcoming gun rights policy conference.
Click to expand...

PA is in the 3rd circuit along with DE and NJ. 2nd circuit is NY, CT and VT. There are AWB cases in a number of circuits. 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 9th all have active AWB cases. Several also have mag limit cases too.

The cases to watch for the quickest decisions on AWBs is the 4th circuit and the southern district court of California (roger benetiz)

The 4th circuit case was remanded back to it from SCOTUS after the NYSRPA decision and the panel hearing it is a Clinton judge, Obama and trump. The Clinton appointee was the dissent in the Kolbe vs hogan decision in 2017 upholding the Maryland AWB. So you’d assume he’d be a vote to strike down the AWB and the trump judge would be the 2nd. Would the entire 4th circuit take the case en banc as they did in Kolbe? The 4th was stacked with artist liberals by Obama and is as liberal or more than any circuit in the country.

In the southern district of California federal court, Miller vs bonta is the AWB case where bush appointee Benetiz struck down the AWB. The 9th circuit remanded it to rehear post NYSRA vs bruen. Benetiz has ordered a quick schedule of briefs and it’s likely he’ll rule before January. He struck it down pre NYSRPA, he’s definitely striking it down post. The 9th is a 16-13 dem majority court. A 3 judge panel struck down mag limits a few years ago 2-1 but the enbanc reversed that, then SCOTUS GVRd it and that mag limit case is back with benetiz again too. The en banc is 10 random judges and the chief judge (a liberal Obama judge) because the 9th is so large.

Benetiz will strike down the mag limits and AWB then the 9th 3 judge panel gets it then a possible en banc. We’re a year to 18 months at least for clarity in the 9th. Hopefully we’ll see some clarity in the 4th by next June

The first AWB was in CA in the early 1990s, the first mag limit was NJ in 1988. There is no way those types of laws can stand after NYSRPA with the text history standard of review
 
Hoover said:
The first AWB was in CA in the early 1990s, the first mag limit was NJ in 1988.
Click to expand...
I would swear Boston had one in '89 - unless you mean state-level bans?

apnews.com

Dukakis Signs Boston Assault Weapons Ban

BOSTON (AP) _ Gov. Michael S. Dukakis signed legislation Saturday banning assault weapons in Boston, saying he'd like to see greater gun control across Massachusetts and the nation. ''Semiautomatic assault-style weapons are designed for one purpose and one purpose only,'' Dukakis said...
apnews.com apnews.com
"This act shall take effect upon its passage - Approved December 9, 1989."

Searching for that brought me to the city's website:
www.boston.gov

Owning a Firearm in Boston

Disclaimer information: The below information provides general advice to help guide people and should not be considered legal advice. There may be additional rules and regulations that apply in different circumstances.
www.boston.gov www.boston.gov

Hey @Comm2A, should they be reminded that this page is out of date?
 
Dench said:
Whose to say they won't ignore the new case also?
Click to expand...

Too many on this forum seem oblivious of this and actually think case law matters. Well it only matters to the extent state agents care. And when they are tyrants, they don’t. They’ll continue to do whatever they want and there isn’t a single court ruling that can ever change this fact.
 
KBCraig said:
SCOTUS rejected the bump stock ban. While irritating, I think it's good to delay.

It was not really a 2A case post-Bruen. It was a Chevron deference case, and the current majority aren't all aligned on that issue.
Click to expand...

The 5th circuit is hearing a bump stock case en banc. The 5th is the most conservative in the country and likely to strike down trumps ban on bump stocks. That will create a circuit split and maybe SCOTUS takes it then. Even with the circuit split, I’m not sure SCOTUS takes it. Bump stocks are small potatoes in the 2A world so I think SCOTUS will take up a mag limit, AWB or sensitive places case before bumpstocks
 
Hoover said:
The 5th circuit is hearing a bump stock case en banc. The 5th is the most conservative in the country and likely to strike down trumps ban on bump stocks. That will create a circuit split and maybe SCOTUS takes it then. Even with the circuit split, I’m not sure SCOTUS takes it. Bump stocks are small potatoes in the 2A world so I think SCOTUS will take up a mag limit, AWB or sensitive places case before bumpstocks
Click to expand...
I hope so.
 
KBCraig said:
SCOTUS rejected the bump stock ban. While irritating, I think it's good to delay.

It was not really a 2A case post-Bruen. It was a Chevron deference case, and the current majority aren't all aligned on that issue.
Click to expand...

I believe that there are other cases involving the administrative state in front of scotus right now that are better.
 
Dennis in MA said:
Bump stocks may end up moot if the SC boots the NFA. Better to save that fight until AFTER all of hte Bruen fallout falls. . . well, out.
Click to expand...

Bump stocks would be effectively moot if the Hughes amendment were repealed and the registry were re-opened.

The Hughes amendment is the only reason anyone bothered with bump stocks or binary triggers or forced reset triggers.
 

Similar threads

Garland v. VanDerStok
Replies
0
Views
113
lutstribe
L
Supreme Court decision on rifle bans
Replies
9
Views
738
Tartakovsky
Tartakovsky
Supreme Court ending permits
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Worcester State Court Gun Policy
Replies
12
Views
453
Mark from ?
M
Is it time yet for a "Why is there even a dealer classifieds" Megathread?
Replies
12
Views
266
Individualist
Individualist
Back
Top Bottom