Trump's new nominee for Supreme Court Justice is Neil Gorsuch

In for the discussion. ONe search i looked up was that he didn't have a lot of 2A related rulings in the past

It's my understanding that In United States v. Rodriguez, 739 F.3d 481 (11th Cir. 2013), Gorsuch sided with the opinion of the court's decision that an officer may disarm a citizen based solely on the fact the citizen is armed, rather than based on whether the citizen has a permit to carry said firearm. The court's opinion was that the mere presence of the firearm equated to a potential threat to the officer.

I need Sam1911 elaborate on this one for me. I'm not a lawyer.

Me neither.


There's a long thread on that case going on though. Take a look. Doesn't sound like a whole lot changed.

Sam1911 said:

Me neither.


There's a long thread on that case going on though. Take a look. Doesn't sound like a whole lot changed.

Click to expand...

I know Sam. But you always make things not only understandable, but enjoyable to read.

Do you have the link for that thread?

Sorry, I misspoke! I was thinking of this one: https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...t-stops-even-those-with-carry-permits.816917/

Sounds like the kind of original constructionist that we need on the Court.

BigBore44 said:

It's my understanding that In United States v. Rodriguez, 739 F.3d 481 (11th Cir. 2013), Gorsuch sided with the opinion of the court's decision that an officer may disarm a citizen based solely on the fact the citizen is armed, rather than based on whether the citizen has a permit to carry said firearm. The court's opinion was that the mere presence of the firearm equated to a potential threat to the officer.

I need Sam1911 elaborate on this one for me. I'm not a lawyer.

Click to expand...

Edit: I have not spent much time in NM in recent years but I personally open carried while hiking when I did, so part of my initial post below can't be explained by anything other than a "brain fart". Corrections in Red. Rather the easily spotted poorly concealed weapon in Rodriguez was the probable cause of a crime unlike Robinson where the officer did not yet have probable cause and could only search under Terry v. Ohio. Thanks to Systema1927 for jogging my faulty memory.

Rodriguez should not be confused with Robinson. They are very different cases. The former was in New Mexico which does not have open carry[wrong] and in which a carry permit is considered a statutory exception to the crime of carrying a concealed [corrected] deadly weapon in public (the absence of a permit is not an element of the crime) whereas the latter occurred in West Virginia which is an open carry state[not applicable]. Both were "man with a gun" calls. In Rodriguez the gun was poorly concealed and spotted by the officer.

The criteria for disarming in the former case is that probable cause for a crime was observed. The latter case relied on the criteria in Terry v. Ohio when there is not yet probable cause to believe a crime has been committed. You do not need probable cause of a crime to question someone under Terry but you do need reasonable and articulable suspicions that they are armed and dangerous to disarm them while questioning them. Once you have probable cause of a crime you can take all kinds of things from a person's possession. Robinson is the troubling Armed=Dangerous case. In New Mexico carrying a gun is generally illegal vs. generally legal in West Virginia [wrong]. Rodriguez followed precedence:

The Supreme Court has told us a statutory exception to a crime constitutes an element of that crime only where the exception "is so incorporated with the language defining the offence that the ingredients of the offence cannot be accurately and clearly described if the exception is omitted." United States v. Cook, 84 U.S. 168, 173, 17 Wall. 168, 21 L.Ed. 538 (1872). Accordingly, "where one can omit the exception from [a] statute without doing violence to the definition of the offense," United States v. McArthur, 108 F.3d 1350, 1353 (11th Cir.1997), that exception is not an element of the offense absent a discernible legislative intent to the contrary. And that means such exception need not bear upon an investigating officer's initial determination of reasonable suspicion where the exception's applicability would not be readily apparent to a prudent officer prior to the suspect's seizure. Cf. id. at 1355 ("Where defendants are better equipped to prove facts that would allow them to take advantage of a statutory exception, we ordinarily view that exception as an affirmative defense.").

Click to expand...

Mike

Sounds good to me. He is definitely an originalist, and being only 49, will be around a long time, which is going to be a huge win for the RKBA, IMO.

Hardiman would have been much better for us - he has a strong pro-2A record. Trump was bowing to the religious right with Gorsuch.

Well considering a possible Clinton appointment had the outcome been different, Im happy. Of course some people are never satisfied no matter what.

Well considering Trump had the opportunity to appoint an explicitly pro-2A justice already on his short list, well, yes, I am not satisfied.

Well you get what you get! We almost had Merrick Garland and thank God the republicans blocked that. Im looking at the whole picture as a win.Give the guy a chance.

slim67 said:

Well considering a possible Clinton appointment had the outcome been different, Im happy. Of course some people are never satisfied no matter what.

Click to expand...

And some people are easily pleased. "Not a Clinton appointment" is a laughably low bar; you guys elected Trump because you wanted far better, no?

Yes, this is a bit of a dissappointment; more so because it's a given that Congress won't ask any illuminating questions on gun rights. Seeing as we just had that district court opinion about being lawfully armed equating to surrendering your first & fourth amendment rights, a judicial record of coming down on the side of police in MWAG issues is not encouraging, regardless the circumstances. Sadly, we'll once again be forced to confirm a justice before we know what's in him, when it comes to gun rights, since it is such a low priority for the people making the decisions. And once again, we can be certain he knows little of this very thorny area of law, logic, and culture.

It's especially frustrating because, unlike abortion/gays/immigration/etc, gun issues are coming to a head and will likely be resolved one way or the other in the next decade (my money's on us winning, but all it takes is a Souter-style screw up and we lose at least another decade waiting on the stars to align). One would think that with close advisors, a dedicated think tank, and firm promises all dedicated to RKBA issues, Trump would be aware of this unique moment to guide the course of this civil rights struggle to its rightful conclusion, and would choose a person with some experience thinking about the implications.

Of course, it's entirely possible this is a feint, since it's a given the Democrats will throw everything they have into opposing Trump's first nominee in a futile attempt to redeem themselves and feign relevance. Just look around at the last 1.5 weeks.

TCB

Tonight's MSN news reported that Gorsuch is occasionally "skeptical" of law enforcement ... whatever they mean by that. Assuming they're imply he's got some libertarian leanings ...

I elected Trump because I vote Republican and I didnt want Clinton. Im not sure what else to say about it but Im certain theres a fair amount of people that feel the same way. You sem confident that will we win this war against the anti-gunners so why is my comment laughable? How am I supposed to feel?

Aim1 said:

He might be Trump's 2nd pick for SCOTUS if he gets one.


I think Gorush will be easily confirmed.

I think as easily as the Republicans rolled over for Obama the Democrats will roll over for Trump. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Click to expand...

Im sure Ginsburg is having a meltdown right about now. Im hoping for a 3rd pick as well!

roscoe said:

Hardiman would have been much better for us - he has a strong pro-2A record. Trump was bowing to the religious right with Gorsuch.

Click to expand...

A strict originalist will protect the 2A. A nominee with an explicit pro-2A record would IMO be harder to get confirmed because "gun control" is a bigger pushbutton for the Dems.

This judge certainly gets the NRA-ILA seal of approval:

https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...l-gorsuchs-nomination-to-the-us-supreme-court

Good news, for sure.

Bayou

barnbwt said:

And some people are easily pleased. "Not a Clinton appointment" is a laughably low bar; you guys elected Trump because you wanted far better, no?

Click to expand...

Problem is, we have too many on our side that expect 100% agreement with our particular views or I'm gonna scream and pout and stomp my feet. I'm not gonna support this guy.

The liberal/socialist/communist party succeeds because they unify behind whatever is the cause of the day. We want to crucify somebody because they wear the wrong color socks

You can view this as the glass half full, or if Hillary had won, the dems smashing the glass and making you eat the pieces

Just want to be clear with all of you ,even the ones who may disagree with me. All I'm trying to say is for the last 8 years was very pessimistic for gun owners. Probably not as bad as it could have been now that it's over. I'm not saying your wrong for a Gorsuch confirmation being your first or even second choice. I am trying to be optimistic now that a much more pro gun regime is in place. I went and voted like I always do,supported pro gun politicians, kept my NRA dues up and wrote letters to my representatives and even once to a California representative. I'm sorry you didn't get your pick this time, but there will be another. If he sucks, I'll be the first to admit it.And lastly, yes I do stand by what I said about the Clinton alternative,laughably or not.

Arizona_Mike said:

The former was in New Mexico which does not have open carry

Click to expand...

Huh? New Mexico has been an open carry state as long as I can remember. http://www.opencarry.org/state-info-n-s/new-mexico/