Supreme Court - NYSRPA v. Bruen - Megathread

[Picton]

I don't think this will end the MA licensing scheme. I think it will remove the Chief's influence from it. It remains to be seen how the Legislature tries to get around the fact that refusal to issue needs to be based on well-defined reasoning.

@Dench is right to raise the specter of Red Flag Laws. But this still represents a big step in the right direction, especially for folks living in red towns.

 

[doxdsgn]

Think SCOTUS made it clear that "cause gunz" is no longer sufficient reason for regulations that infringe. Doesn't mean it won't be a struggle, but the "two-step" analysis the Circuit courts have used since Heller and McDonald have been specifically thrown out.

 

[DispositionMatrix]

Yup. They're gonna add in all these "prohibited places". Which hopefully will ALSO get taken to court and proven to not be in the spirit of this decision.

After years. Ban states can keep playing this game in perpetuity.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

For MA it will eliminate needing references or letters. It will eliminate the question of what purpose, IE all lawful purposes. It will also remove any denials without a felony. The language "moral character" in the opinion removes this.

No it will not, at least not without further litigation. The MA licensing system is a problem in and of itself because individual PDs control the process without any real control. Many towns that are effectively 'shall issue' still impose these requirements.

I'm hopeful that MA will go to a fully on-line system where you submit your application on-line and its routed to the indivdiual PD for review and processing. I have reason to believe that something like that is in the work. This would be the key to greater accountability. Florida, Washington and other states are already using a system like this. I've recently done both of those and they work great.

 

[Glocklike tendencies]

what about denials for suitability in MA?
lawyers please chime in an opinion?
is it time to re-apply if you have been denied for non-violent, 10 year old unproven allegations?

 

[Dench]

@Dench is right to raise the specter of Red Flag Laws. But this still represents a big step in the right direction, especially for folks living in red towns.

How is this a step towards restoring our citizenry as able militiamen? Miller was supposed to cover that, which it did, and its 100% ignored. Heller was sorta supposed to cover it, which it did in theory which went ignored. McDonald was supposed to correct the part that states ignored about Heller and that's also ignored.

This ruling is inferior to all the ones I just listed. And it will also go ignored/abused/skirted. There's already a well established and publicly supported system that 100% undermines the 2A.

SCOTUS aint touching that shit.

The only thing SCOTUS touches for 2A cases is garbage like this.

 

[Picton]

“We're in for a whole new slew of litigation challenging any and every gun-control measure in light of the analysis in today’s ruling,” said Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law.

“'Beyond voiding the laws of the six states that, like New York, condition the right to carry in public on a discretionary judgment by state officials, the majority’s expansion of what the Second Amendment protects will have monumental ramifications far beyond carrying firearms in public — on everything from age restrictions to assault weapons bans to limits on high-capacity magazines,' Vladeck said.

"The five other states that have similar regulations are California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts and New Jersey, which include some of the most densely populated cities in the country that also struggle with gun violence."

I'm reading CNN, mostly for the schadenfreude value. But if their guy is saying MA licensing is in trouble now, I'm happy about it.

 

[Tinkermatic]

I wonder what it means for restrictions in red towns such as Brookline and Boston?
From what I understand, getting ‘unrestricted’ in Boston means proving you have a necessary reason to carry i.e. lawyer, doctor, connected, etc.
I think Brookline will renew without restrictions? This decision would seemingly pave the way for the restrictions becoming a thing of the past, but I really have no idea what I’m talking about.

 

[Picton]

How is this a step towards restoring our citizenry as able militiamen?

Because it says denial of RKBA cannot be arbitrary...

Brookline and places like it rely on opaque decisions by civil servants to determine suitability. That's pretty arbitrary.

 

[drgrant]

I'm so tired of "compromise" on the right. Just spike the ball and repeal everything.

The same Supreme court that rubber stamped DUI checkpoints and other trash like Kelo or Abramski was never going to do that, lol.

 

[Bladerunner]

The decision along with Kavanaugh's cautionary concurrence sound about right. I'm really disappointed in the dissent. The crux of this case was really all about New York's subjective licensing regime. Breyer along with most commentators utterly fail to address this issue. Dispite all the hand wrining, this decision is far less consequential to far fewer Americans than many of the court's other decisions this term, like Dobbs and Shinn. Our Second Amendment rights are on a good trajectory. Too bad it's at the cost of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments.

Agreed, biggest loser here is Breyer and his appeal to emotion legal googly gook.

 

[Broc]

what about denials for suitability in MA?
lawyers please chime in an opinion?
is it time to re-apply if you have been denied for non-violent, 10 year old unproven allegations?

Contact a lawyer.

 

[drgrant]

Correct but it will take more lawsuits, more money, and more time. Just look at the stun gun debacle in MA.

Actually Caetano was a turbo job.

My suspicion is the shithole states will crank up their base qualifiers for licensing to make it onerous, but still fall below some legal bar.

 

[ChevyGuy91]

Man, some of you guys are too busy high five-ing and back patting to realize this means nothing for the people that were banking on this meaning something.

Wake me up when SCOTUS does something actually useful and RvW gets overturned.

 

[VetteGirlMA]

No it will not, at least not without further litigation. The MA licensing system is a problem in and of itself because individual PDs control the process without any real control. Many towns that are effectively 'shall issue' still impose these requirements.

I'm hopeful that MA will go to a fully on-line system where you submit your application on-line and its routed to the indivdiual PD for review and processing. I have reason to believe that something like that is in the work. This would be the key to greater accountability. Florida, Washington and other states are already using a system like this. I've recently done both of those and they work great.

I don't see how an e-filing scheme solves anything. So anyone goes online and fills out an LTC app similar to applying for a credit card. On the back end the local PD can do anything they want. What needs to happen is the power needs to be taken away from the police altogether. Otherwise the shenanigans are going to happen in a smoke filled backroom far from public scrutiny because the police are going to be pressured by local politicians with their own requirements. Then we're back where we started.

 

[SFC13557]

I wonder what it means for restrictions in red towns such as Brookline and Boston?
From what I understand, getting ‘unrestricted’ in Boston means proving you have a necessary reason to carry i.e. lawyer, doctor, connected, etc.
I think Brookline will renew without restrictions? This decision would seemingly pave the way for the restrictions becoming a thing of the past, but I really have no idea what I’m talking about.

If the towns adhere to the Court's decision it should negate those rules but we know Boston will ignore the ruling IMHO.

 

[Bladerunner]

No more letters to the chief of police asking to suck his his chud for your LTC.

 

[mousegunfan]

Man, some of you guys are too busy high five-ing and back patting to realize this means nothing for the people that were banking on this meaning something.

Wake me up when SCOTUS does something actually useful and RvW gets overturned.

Every little bit helps. One step at a time.

 

[Bladerunner]

Range tests incoming. You must hit the bullseye on every shot.

 

[Mesatchornug]

This means nothing!

A concurring opinion is an opinion that agrees with the majority opinion but does not agree with the rationale behind it. Instead of joining the majority, the concurring judge will write a separate opinion describing the basis behind their decision. Concurring opinions are not binding since they did not receive the majority of the court's ...

His statement has no force of law. It exists within context. I haven't had time to read it yet, but I'd be surprised if he's not explaining the actual decision here before going on to clarify where he differs.

 

[Broc]

Gotta celebrate the wins when we get them. Which is few and far between. Hopefully this will push more states to Constitutional carry? We've already got 25 (with florida lagging behind...>.>) So yes we still shouldn't need a permit. But now at least those people who couldn't get one before because the chief in their down is anti-gun can now get one. The more we can introduce into the population the better. The more common it is, the less people will be afraid of it (hopefully).

People won't be able to just get a permit because of this desicion.

The chief can still tell you to s*ck it, you will then have to contact a lawyer, the lawyer will have to educate the chief and hope the chief will back down. If the chief won't back down you will have to spend months/years and thousands in court while the chief doesn't give a f*ck because it doesn't cost him anything.

I wish it was as easy as you make it sound, but we live in MA, nothing is that easy.

Although thibgs are slowly getting better. For example, many red towns now renew without restrictions (including Boston). While it is not perfect, it is a step in the right direction.

We will see what happens when Maura becomes supreme leader of MA. I dont think Maura will f*ck with CLEO, I think she will mostly go after "assault" rifles and online purchases.

 

[drgrant]

I don't see how an e-filing scheme solves anything. So anyone goes online and fills out an LTC app similar to applying for a credit card. On the back end the local PD can do anything they want. What needs to happen is the power needs to be taken away from the police altogether. Otherwise the shenanigans are going to happen in a smoke filled backroom far from public scrutiny because the police are going to be pressured by local politicians with their own requirements. Then we're back where we started.

E filing would kill the 2nd biggest problem in MA licensing which is obstructionism/turtling. Its way easier to document a process if the app is timestamped etc. Vs "we don't take applications at dispatch you need to talk to officer businblah" etc.

 

[Chevy 2 65]

If that's the case, why even having a licensing scheme at all? They should have just said licensing schemes are unconstitutional and left no wiggle room.

Just another vague ruling. The pukes will find another way.

 

[xero2099]

Man, some of you guys are too busy high five-ing and back patting to realize this means nothing for the people that were banking on this meaning something.

Wake me up when SCOTUS does something actually useful and RvW gets overturned.

cant win a war unless win the small battles

 

[JRT]

The ruling sucks because at the end of the day for the actual 2A and it's purposes it does ZERO.

And the stuff that it "actually does," which again is nothing in reality, is easily bypassed by a conviction free red flag claim.

So congratulations, gentlemen. The king SHALL grant you your gun license. And that king can take it away at any time for any reason without a conviction.

People who think this is a win are dumb-dumbs. This is a complete waste of time and another lost opportunity to restore the 2A as intended.

Thomas points out that if addressed by the court red-flag laws could be unconstitutional.

 

[drgrant]

People won't be able to just get a permit because of this desicion.

The chief can still tell you to s*ck it, you will then have to contact a lawyer, the lawyer will have to educate the chief and hope the chief will back down... or you can spend months/years and thousands in court while the chief doesn't give a f*ck because it doesn't cost him anything.

I wish it was as easy as you make it sound, but we live in MA, nothing is that easy.

Although slowly things are.getting better. For example, many red towns now renew without restrictions (including Boston). While it is not perfect, it is a step in the right direction.

We will see what happens when Maura becomes supreme leader of MA.

People don't understand that even if the court says X that doesn't mean that Thugs and tyrants will suddenlt not be trying to abuse people.... honestly I expect the abuse to continue until the courts have occasion to brace the bad actirs but good luck with that. There's never/rarely a real penalty for the "state being wrong".

 

[Broc]

E filing would kill the 2nd biggest problem in MA licensing which is obstructionism/turtling. Its way easier to document a process if the app is timestamped etc. Vs "we don't take applications at dispatch you need to talk to officer businblah" etc.

Exactly. It will also stop the dicking around of licensing officers never answering their phone or replying to Emails so people can drop their applications.

Online submissions would solve a bunch of problems.

 

[xtry51]

Thomas points out that if addressed by the court red-flag laws could be unconstitutional.

Great. I can't wait to stand by for a decade or two instead of SCOTUS simply handing down a f***ing clear ruling with zero exceptions.

 

[VetteGirlMA]

E filing would kill the 2nd biggest problem in MA licensing which is obstructionism/turtling. Its way easier to document a process if the app is timestamped etc. Vs "we don't take applications at dispatch you need to talk to officer businblah" etc.

So some local PD just turtles everyone by saying "Come in some time next year to get your picture taken". Yep it's filed electronically, it's just inconvenient to everyone to get fingerprinted and pictures taken. Or we talking about complete elimination of pictures and fingerprints?

 

[Mesatchornug]

E filing would kill the 2nd biggest problem in MA licensing which is obstructionism/turtling. Its way easier to document a process if the app is timestamped etc. Vs "we don't take applications at dispatch you need to talk to officer businblah" etc.

It also could kill all the extra requirements. If the online portion is the application, then the PD exists for prints and interview...