Supreme Court - NYSRPA v. Bruen - Megathread

[Admin]

Make no mistake about it, she's a gun grabbing Leftist from Hawaii. A good looking one, but one nonetheless. She speaks like a moderate, but isn't one.

That's my take on her. I am hoping that some of her lefty followers realize firearms are actually tools.

 

[pastera]

Lotsa Mass. people here (myself included). Those of us sitting outside of Boston with LTC, probably not much change.

I grew up in Jersey. This is huge. My dad had to get an FID card to get a freakin' BB gun. Get a carry license? Ha. I think the only LTC regime worse is Hawaii. Such an anti-state. A number of non-residents found themselves jammed up just for passing through.

Too bad no hollow point carry (...for now...)

Very likely an easy target now - I think AWB and magazine capacity limits will fall next since they effect a much larger audience.

 

[Dr_Scholl]

Very likely an easy target now - I think AWB and magazine capacity limits will fall next since they effect a much larger audience.

The Maryland AWB is before SCOTUS now. They should decide within the next few days if they're going to hear the case.

But yeah, that'll be the next fight, whether SCOTUS takes the case or not.

 

[Bladerunner]

I can wait for Maura's press release ending may issue. The letters of reference is the one element of the licensing scheme I want to see eliminated, but CA is keeping it, so it will be kept here. A lawsuit needs to be filed ASAP.

 

[Waher]

I can wait for Maura's press release ending may issue. The letters of reference is the one element of the licensing scheme I want to see eliminated, but CA is keeping it, so it will be kept here. A lawsuit needs to be filed ASAP.

CalGuns, GOA, FPC, SAF, are going to go nuclear on CA because if they can win there it's GAME OVER for Bloomberg.

 

[Picton]

Question is how readily will authorities arbitrarily and capriciously revoke permits to effectively create restrictions since they have to issue permits but it has not been determined what happens if they do not allow people to keep them. I bet that game gets played until struck in courts.

They may, yes. But the ultimate outcome is in no doubt now for any reasonably well-heeled defendant, or even for GOAL: if I understand due process, this is the kind of arrest that leads straight to a federal civil rights injunction preventing the restriction, with a habeas corpus motion to void the arrest and, later, a wrongful arrest lawsuit. One or two rabidly moonbat chiefs might want to go through that nonsense, but most won't want the paperwork.

The Maryland AWB is before SCOTUS now. They should decide within the next few days if they're going to hear the case.

But yeah, that'll be the next fight, whether SCOTUS takes the case or not.

My feeling now is that SCOTUS won't need to rule on a lot of these AWB/mag cases any longer. The new scrutiny rule is clear, and so is the outcome of these cases. I think all SCOTUS has to do now is grant cert, at which point most states will largely fold their tents to avoid a direct smackdown with precedent. They'll change their own laws rather than that.

Some states may go full moonbat and pursue this all the way up, but SCOTUS already has an answer for them. The reasoning in this ruling makes that clear. It would just be a waste of time and money for those states, especially if there are no significant personnel changes on the Court in the near future.

 

[babygorilla]

Wondering now if open carry will now be a thing in MA, since the main jist behind why no one did previously is that there was concern over the CoP considering you to be unsuitable at renewal, since OC is not illegal in MA.

 

[omega42]

They may, yes. But the ultimate outcome is in no doubt now for any reasonably well-heeled defendant, or even for GOAL: if I understand due process, this is the kind of arrest that leads straight to a federal civil rights injunction preventing the restriction, with a habeas corpus motion to void the arrest and, later, a wrongful arrest lawsuit. One or two rabidly moonbat chiefs might want to go through that nonsense, but most won't want the paperwork.



My feeling now is that SCOTUS won't need to rule on a lot of these AWB/mag cases any longer. The new scrutiny rule is clear, and so is the outcome of these cases. I think all SCOTUS has to do now is grant cert, at which point most states will largely fold their tents to avoid a direct smackdown with precedent. They'll change their own laws rather than that.

Some states may go full moonbat and pursue this all the way up, but SCOTUS already has an answer for them. The reasoning in this ruling makes that clear. It would just be a waste of time and money for those states, especially if there are no significant personnel changes on the Court in the near future.

It doesn't have to be near future. Nearly 50 years between Roe v. Wade and Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. About 60 years between Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education. The courts are politically controlled and, despite the image they strive to project, politically motivated. This decision is likely to stand for a generation or three but it is not settled for all time.

 

[Bonesinium]

This ruling does not hold this - Place of carry is specifically called out as not being a covered subject.
Please read the opinion and concurrences - they are written pretty plainly so are easy for the layperson to understand

So easy to understand yet you don’t?


“Respondents’ argument would in effect exempt cities from the Second Amendment and would eviscerate the general right to publicly carry arms for self-defense that we discuss in detail below. See Part III–B, infra. Put simply, there is no historical basis for New York to effectively declare the island of Manhattan a “sensitive place” simply because it is crowded and protected generally by the New York City Po- lice Department.”

 

[Roadglide]

I agree with you, the states in question could add more BS requirements, just like they did in Washington D.C. It's hard for me to believe that these people who have been suppressing our 2nd Amendment rights for so long would just surrender all their power because of one court ruling. So tell me, who will enforce this new shall-issue law? The very people who want to restrict our rights? No one in authority in Massachusetts is going to make it easy for anyone to get a LTC. I have had a LTC for over 45 years and they still make it difficult for me. Despite what many people may think, that is just not going to happen in the near future. But if it ever does happen, it won't happen until many battles are fought on the state and local levels.

I'm not sure if I agree. I see it as if one person argues properly and successfully in court, I think the floodgates will burst.

 

[PappyM3]

She wants to appear "Centrist " .
You'll find out once she's elected and makes a tire screeching hard left turn.

I don’t think so, not necessarily. But it is evident now she would do whatever will increase her odds of re-election.

I used to respect her. But she has gone from being centrist leaning, to pandering to the right. Like a light switch. I get opposing democrats that crapped all over her during the presidential campaign. But she’s gone full blown weasel politician.

 

[Roadglide]

Odds are Medford will tell you they aren't doing anything until an opinion is obtained by Medford's legal counsel.

I fully expect Maura to issue a bullshit advisory letter after conferring with the Cabal, Sugar Daddy Bloomberg, and maybe even the DoJ in D.C.

Then you put them on notice that while they are discussing legal options with their attorney you will be discussing your options with your attorney. Put it in writing and cc the select board or city council. The police dept. will play games but you will get the attention of the people who hold the purse strings.

 

[usp45ct]

No your NH permit would not be valid in MA. The decision wasn't about reciprocity.

while that seems to be the case on the face of it, does MA out of state permit requirements pass the smell test under the 14th A or equal protection under the law. Couldnt a lawyer state that just because their client lives out of state they should not have to jump through different hoops to get a non-res permit?

 

[LittleCalm]

So easy to understand yet you don’t?


“Respondents’ argument would in effect exempt cities from the Second Amendment and would eviscerate the general right to publicly carry arms for self-defense that we discuss in detail below. See Part III–B, infra. Put simply, there is no historical basis for New York to effectively declare the island of Manhattan a “sensitive place” simply because it is crowded and protected generally by the New York City Po- lice Department.”

This. Was covered like 10 pages ago.

 

[PappyM3]

…
My feeling now is that SCOTUS won't need to rule on a lot of these AWB/mag cases any longer. The new scrutiny rule is clear, and so is the outcome of these cases. I think all SCOTUS has to do now is grant cert, at which point most states will largely fold their tents to avoid a direct smackdown with precedent. They'll change their own laws rather than that.

Some states may go full moonbat and pursue this all the way up, but SCOTUS already has an answer for them. The reasoning in this ruling makes that clear. It would just be a waste of time and money for those states, especially if there are no significant personnel changes on the Court in the near future.

You have way more faith in blue states respecting SCOTUS opinions on 2A matters than I do.

But I hope you’re right.

 

[Picton]

You have way more faith in blue states respecting SCOTUS opinions on 2A matters than I do.

But I hope you’re right.

I am heartened that NJ and CA are already starting to bow to the inevitable. I don't think all of them will, but it's a start.

I've got a friend who's a New Yorker. She's hearing things, too. Good things for our side.

 

[mpd61]

I can wait for Maura's press release ending may issue. The letters of reference is the one element of the licensing scheme I want to see eliminated, but CA is keeping it, so it will be kept here. A lawsuit needs to be filed ASAP.

I don't think we'll hear from her on this for a while. Too busy winding up about Roe Wade.

 

[safetyfirst2125]

The most encouraging part of this ruling for me was Justice Thomas’ commentary that the court is ready to start knocking down other 2A cases. That is pretty mind blowing. What the heck happened to SCOTUS for this change of attitude and what took them so long?

Was Roberts in the way and now he’s outnumbered?

In case you missed it:

 

[paul73]

What the heck happened to SCOTUS for this change of attitude and what took them so long?

a mob of rowdy hooligans camping and chanting by the windows of their private residences, perhaps?
and i bet the leak done by some socialist rat in their court did not help much neither.

 

[Waher]

Wondering now if open carry will now be a thing in MA, since the main jist behind why no one did previously is that there was concern over the CoP considering you to be unsuitable at renewal, since OC is not illegal in MA.

I can see MA regulating open carry to require the same retention holsters as police departments and having that requirement hold up in court because it would be "uniform" for all persons in the state.

The most encouraging part of this ruling for me was Justice Thomas’ commentary that the court is ready to start knocking down other 2A cases. That is pretty mind blowing. What the heck happened to SCOTUS for this change of attitude and what took them so long?

Roberts is obsessed with protecting the 'reputation, integrity, and independence' of the court and the media + mobs may have finally pushed him to realize the Obamacare pretzel and tightrope walking he had been doing for years trying to not rock the boat was damaging the court rather than protecting it.

Kav and ACB also may have been in a "lets just keep our heads down" state of mind which has now gone to a "we are going to be hunted and hated by these freaks no matter what we do, so we might as well do the right thing".

 

[JoseyWales]

I can see MA regulating open carry to require the same retention holsters as police departments and having that requirement hold up in court because it would be "uniform" for all persons in the state.

How about new Glocks that the PDs use with those holsters in MA?

 

[Waher]

How about new Glocks that the PDs use with those holsters in MA?

I think this might be a good opportunity to appeal that Consumer Protection excuse now that SCotUS affirmed 14A protections to the 2A. If the AG thinks Glocks are truly dangerous enough that consumers can't buy them, then state agencies shouldn't be able to buy 'dangerous defective/deceptive' equipment either.

Pretty much if items are in common use by police/military I don't see how they can be banned. Maybe cane swords, poison darts, or other kind of 'assassin' hidden weapons that have 'no military purpose' per previous SCotUS rulings can be banned.

 

[Picton]

What the heck happened to SCOTUS for this change of attitude and what took them so long?

Was Roberts in the way and now he’s outnumbered?

What we saw this week is the influence of Trump's picks, 100%.

 

[Bladerunner]

a mob of rowdy hooligans camping and chanting by the windows of their private residences, perhaps?
and i bet the leak done by some socialist rat in their court did not help much neither.

The justices have seen the erosion of law and order. They winessed the lawless agencies of the federal government collude to illegally frame a sitting Predident, with zero ramufications. I believe those on the right know they are one of the last institutions that can save this country. Or perhaps I'm just being a faggot.

 

[Mesatchornug]

What we saw this week is the influence of Trump's picks, 100%.

Possibly exacerbated by the installation process circus for at least three of them... culminating in a month of threats, etc.

I'm a poor student of history, but this probably reflects at least as far back as Bork

 

[Rob Boudrie]

The issue is not of open carry will become legal - it already is, but if LTC holders will be able to open carry with fear of an adverse suitability decision.

It is unlikely MA courts are going to interpret the SCOTUS decision as changing anything about "suitability", and only accepting that the "special need" criteria no longer applies. But, some things become simpler - for example, we no longer have to worry about standing when bringing an LTC case because "the applicant has not applied for the minimal license(s) that would permit having a handgun in the home" which until the decision was the only clearly recognized Heller right.

 

[SFC13557]

I watched an interview with NYC mayor Eric adams. He’s not just liberal, he’s pretty damn stupid. He want BS’ing, he was really ignorant of the laws.

Listening to him and the governor, etc talk about it becoming the Wild West, etc. it’s the same nonsense the antis say with every debate in states passing constitutional carry.

NYC is already the Wild, Wild, West thanks to Comrade Bill and now this boob Adam's. He's more interested in rubbing elbows with the beautiful people and wearing ridiculous outfits like AOC than arresting violent criminals.

 

[Coyote33]

Deny what?

If subjective licensing regulations are unconstitutional,
why bother getting the LTC reissued without restrictions on the card?
...
The acid test is what happens to you when you get spotted CCWing.


So punch back twice as hard.

...
With dumpster-fire states folding left and right like a wet cardboard suitcase,
all the hurr-durrage from NYS is suddenly sounding mighty hollow.
...

This stuff is all pure gold!!

I DVRd all the local and national news and all the lib cable shows. The response wasn’t much other than from some NY pols and the anti gun groups. I don’t think the general public cares much about the NYSRPA case.

Now is the time to bring on the lawsuits, while they are looking the other way.

They need to juke the left again by ruling on magazine capacity limits and supposed “assault weapons”. Keep throwing haymakers and the left won’t know what cause to protest next.

Again, bring on the lawsuits for the first part of this decision. Then quickly follow-up with the above.

 

[SFC13557]

"I don't think we'll hear from her on this for a while. Too busy winding about Roe Roe."

Correct, this gun case is nothing compared to the abortion case even for a lesbian who doesn't have sex with men.

"What we saw this week is the influence of Trump's picks, 100%."

Correct again, the Ghost of Donald Trump will live on in the heads of liberals for decades. Instead of harassing Justices the screaming, bloody DB's should be protesting at Bill and Hill's house. Hillary was supposed to waltz into the WH to be anointed as the 1st Female President but because of her arrogance she lost to a businessman. The leftists should also be stomping on RBG's grave for not retiring during Barry's reign of terror.

 

[strangenh]

Hopefully I did miss someone asking this.
I wonder how the ruling might affect MA non-res LTCs. Unlike the resident LTC there is no suitability clause for the non-res. Which kinda makes sense since the claim is that the local Chief would know the applicant. But the non-res is May Issue. Would this ruling mean that if you met the conditions of the law regarding non-res licensing they would have to issue?

Would love to hear Comm2a's thoughts on this.

I'm expecting a case where someone is a) denied a non-res license for no good reason, by b) a state that does not recognize that non-residents' home state (or other) licenses.

Alternatively, someone could a) apply in a state that has no non-res license available to them at all and which state b) offers no recognition of a non-resident's home state license (NY technically, IL for residents not on their list of states whose residents can apply for an IL license). That fact set in particular could be based on and reinvigorate the privileges and immunities clause (the Article IV "comity clause") (rather than be brought as a 14th A. privileges or immunities clause case, or as a 14th A substantive due process [which Thomas hates the use of] case).