Quick NYSRPA v NYC recap: - NYC had extreme restrictions on traveling with guns - NYC won in lower courts, case made its way to SCOTUS. 1st SCOTUS gun control case in a decade - NY panics, changes the law at last minute to avoid a ruling from SCOTUS. Several congressmen literally threaten the court in an brief saying that if it does not rule in favor of NY there will be consequences - SCOTUS holds oral arguments but eventually declines to rule on the merits because the conflict is no longer active due to NY's rule change - The conservative judges call out this bullshit and say that they're going to have to do something about all of the clown car lower courts such as the 9th circuit (Califorina etc) basically ignoring SCOTUS' guidance in DC v Heller and letting a bunch of bullshit gun control laws stick around
One of the big unresolved questions is what the standard should be when evaluating the constitutionality of any gun control laws. The lower courts have basically allowed the government to do whatever they want. However, civil rights advocates believe 2A laws are subject to strict scrutiny
>In American constitutional law, strict scrutiny is the highest and most stringent standard of judicial review, and results in a judge striking down a law unless the government can demonstrate in court that a law or regulation: >is necessary to a "compelling state interest"; >that the law is "narrowly tailored" to achieving this compelling purpose; >and that the law uses the "least restrictive means" to achieve the purpose.
Gun control groups were shitting their pants at this possibility because such a standard would BTFO many gun control laws of all flavors nationwide. However, it seems that the court may be trending towards a different standard...
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York, New York
JUSTICE ALITO, with whom JUSTICE GORSUCH joins, and with whom JUSTICE THOMAS joins except for Part IV–B, dissenting. >Once it is recognized that the right at issue is a concomitant of the same right recognized in Heller, it became incumbent on the City to justify the restrictions its rule imposes, but the City has not done so. It points to no evidence of laws in force around the time of the adoption of the Second Amendment that prevented gun owners from practicing outside city limits.
JUSTICE KAVANAUGH, concurring. >And I share JUSTICE ALITO’s concern that some federal and state courts may not be properly applying Heller and McDonald. The Court should address that issue soon, perhaps in one of the several Second Amendment cases with petitions for certiorari now pending before the Court.
CONTEXT, from a 2A case in the Fifth Circuit (sites.law.duke.edu/secondthoughts/2020/04/28/mcginnis-and-the-dubitante-opinion/): >[Judge] Duncan’s concurrence is yet another signal that those judges who have spent decades applying the conventional tiers-of-scrutiny approach to constitutional questions have a revolt brewing. A group of younger, ideologically committed, and vocal judges are ready to upend half a century of jurisprudence for something more steeped in originalist methods, and the Second Amendment (unencumbered by much Supreme Court precedent) is the perfect vehicle for their revolution.
There were 10 cases on hold at SCOTUS pending the outcome of NYSRPA v NYC. After this decision, ALL TEN have been distributed for conference, meaning that someone in SCOTUS believes that they should be discussed internally. Pending the outcome of this discussion, these cases may be accepted and heard by the court.
DISTRIBUTED FOR CONFERENCE
Mance v. Barr, Interstate sales Pena v. Horan, Microstamping Rogers v. Grewal, Carry Gould v. Lipson, Carry Ciolek v. New Jersey, Carry Cheeseman v. Polillo, Carry Worman v. Healey, Assault weapons Malpasso v. Pallozzi, Carry Culp v. Raoul, Non-resident CCW Wilson v. Cook County, Assault weapons Beers v. Barr, Prohibited persons
yes thats the entire point of the thread. they had to toss it out because NY weaseled their way out of it, but SCOTUS is sick of lower courts ignoring DC v Heller and a reckoning is coming. 10 gun control cases in the pipeline have now advanced to the next stage
Adam Gomez
And how long before this “next stage” progresses to them actually dealing with it?
Brayden Reed
they're slated for conference tomorrow on 5/1. typically the court releases decisions regarding if a case will be heart the monday morning after the conference. i think at this point they'd be part of the next SCOTUS term, so a decision would come about a year from now
lets start with throwing out just everything, heller, nfa, you name it gut all those unconstitutional laws and lets return our nation to the great place it used to be when you could order a $20 machine gun from sears.
This. I don't give a crap if full auto is dangerous, impractical or inaccurate or whatever cope boomers give for cucking on the 2nd amendment, the language is very clear. If you want to ban full auto we need a constitutional amendment otherwise fuck off
Tyler Ramirez
Hun control is retarded and malicious at the same time. Useful idiots think it will make them safer Intellectuals know that it's meant to weaken the public
Sebastian Bennett
*gun
Christian Richardson
Bump
Jordan Gray
What are chances of handguns being treated as rifles and shotguns and not requiring permits. NYC licensing process is absolutely insane, worst on planet. Go read up on it
Jonathan Diaz
Good info. Bump.
Angel Morris
As far as I am concearned the 2nd amendment protects the rights to manufacture distribute and own explosives rockets grenades and everything else. It's purpose is to defend from tyranny lets see it happen. plus the niggers will kill eachother faster.
>so a decision would come about a year from now >oct 1st docket being released, the first 10 hearing will be cases from cali, washington, ny, texas, Illinois,maryland,nj,michagan,etc. >trump wins reelection in a landslide its going to be glorius
Brayden Rogers
I'm too dumb to understand all this legal BS. How long until I can laugh at the commie gun grabbers?
I want to believe that the SCOTUS will finally do something and rule to get rid of the uber retard "gotcha" laws (922(r) comes to mind). However they've always punted which is bullshit, and I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think anything will come of this either.
They take way too long to see these cases, especially firearms case.
That is, if they hear them at all
Benjamin Price
as with all things regarding the government, I'll believe it when I see it
I am so tired of the carrot and stick method of dangling hope in front of us only to be dashed against the rocks. This is their method of keeping us passive.
Ryder Wright
Good information! Thank you, sir!
Dominic Howard
The only thing I have confidence in Roberts or his court to BTFO is the constitution
something i want to emphasize because my posts werent as clear as id like due to size limits, it appears that there is a movement among judges (perhaps including those on SCOTUS) to go beyond strict scrutiny and to say that if a gun control law wasnt present and common around the time of the constitution, it is unconstitutional. this, obviously, would be extremely based
i do fear this however its worth noting that he went along with the majority in Heller
