If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/Pioneer Valley Arms April Giveaway ***Smith & Wesson SD9VE 9MM***

Reply to thread

Message

Which is why the new lawsuit adds 42 U.S. Code § 1983 ~~and~~ ~~42 U.S. Code § 1985~~
(edit: on reread of the complaint it does not call out 1985)

Edit: Section 1985 was not actually called out however I do believe that it does apply as the governor and her employees admittedly worked together to create a regulatory scheme designed to render the Bruen decision moot by infringing on a person's 1st,2nd, and 4th rights in such a manner to make the exercise of the 2nd unworkable and socially ostracizing.

This is why the new lawsuit is necessary - We need to get a declaration defining the limits of sensitive places exceptions which have little standing in history, text or tradition.
[URL unfurl="true"]https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/2022/07/new-yorks-response-to-bruen-the-outer-limits-of-the-sensitive-places-doctrine/[/URL]
[URL unfurl="true"]https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3361371[/URL]

Edited to insert link to the new lawsuit

<blockquote data-quote="pastera" data-source="post: 8044051" data-attributes="member: 28768">Which is why the new lawsuit adds<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1983" target="_blank"> 42 U.S. Code § 1983</a>&nbsp; <s>and </s><a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1985" target="_blank"><s>42 U.S. Code § 1985</s></a>(edit: on reread of the complaint it does not call out 1985)Edit: Section 1985 was not actually called out however I do believe that it does apply as the governor and her employees admittedly worked together to create a regulatory scheme designed to render the Bruen decision moot by infringing on a person&#039;s 1st,2nd, and 4th rights in such a manner to make the exercise of the 2nd unworkable and socially ostracizing.<hr />This is why the<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nynd.134455/gov.uscourts.nynd.134455.1.0.pdf" target="_blank"> new lawsuit</a> is necessary - We need to get a declaration defining the limits of sensitive places exceptions which have little standing in history, text or tradition.[URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/2022/07/new-yorks-response-to-bruen-the-outer-limits-of-the-sensitive-places-doctrine/[/URL][URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3361371[/URL]Edited to insert link to the new lawsuit</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pastera, post: 8044051, member: 28768"] Which is why the new lawsuit adds[URL='https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1983'] 42 U.S. Code § 1983[/URL] [S]and [/S][URL='https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1985'][S]42 U.S. Code § 1985[/S][/URL] (edit: on reread of the complaint it does not call out 1985) Edit: Section 1985 was not actually called out however I do believe that it does apply as the governor and her employees admittedly worked together to create a regulatory scheme designed to render the Bruen decision moot by infringing on a person's 1st,2nd, and 4th rights in such a manner to make the exercise of the 2nd unworkable and socially ostracizing. [HR][/HR] This is why the[URL='https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nynd.134455/gov.uscourts.nynd.134455.1.0.pdf'] new lawsuit[/URL] is necessary - We need to get a declaration defining the limits of sensitive places exceptions which have little standing in history, text or tradition. [URL unfurl="true"]https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/2022/07/new-yorks-response-to-bruen-the-outer-limits-of-the-sensitive-places-doctrine/[/URL] [URL unfurl="true"]https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3361371[/URL] Edited to insert link to the new lawsuit [/QUOTE]

Verification