I don't see the courts saying that zero training is the standard. But when you brag about increasing the amount of training required solely to make it harder for people to get permits, you are just asking the courts to say that's not constitutional.
Let me also add that if individual actors violate a bright line constitutional rule, they may be held individually liable, as well.There's one other avenue: Civil litigation will hit NY in its purse.
I was specifically referring to 42 USC 1983, which is civil. If there's criminal liability attached to something like this, it would have to be found elsewhere.AND that liability may be either civil or criminal!
or both.....
I know, but if an executive of the state or the US fails to uphold the rulings of the judiciary, that sets a President up for impeachment (never happening) or if it's a state to be delcared in insurrection and gives a President the authority to arrest state government officials.SCOTUS has no enforcement power. What happens if they rule against NY state and NY decides to just ignore it? Then what? The court has no power of the purse, it has no army at its command, and it cannot force the state do to what it says. Only the Executive or possibly the Legislative branch of the Federal Government can enforce the decision. And neither is interested in doing so.
The restrictions that are being proposed are all setting the stage for the Supreme Court to go nuclear and strike down all conceal carry license schemes.If https://www.newsday.com/news/region...ul-concealed-carry-law-supreme-court-vcwi4xgk
is true and those restrictions passed, then the NY carry permit becomes worthless on a practical level. I'd bet the major of major business opt out of carry - the prose that businesses have to opt in to carry isn't carry. An automatic business ban as default seems to violate Thomas' warning about total sensitive bans. In TX, store has to post bans.
So if these become the law - kiss pratical carry good bye and perhaps years of lawsuits to undo.
The private property ban and government building bans were always used to make carry useless. It will happen again.
That's why SCOTUS never thinks this through. They don't live in a world of having to carry daily in their rarefied lives. If they sat down and role played everyday life of a working person's or parent's carry - they would have stated that locale bans could only be based on technical reasons (such as the MRI). Instead they leave glaring loopholes to ban which were obvious. Heller did the same thing with Scalia's famous kowtow to Kennedy (from Stevens) that allow all the state weapons and mag bans to be supported in the lower courts. Thomas' comments on locale bans were too loose.
TOPS is private property. It bans. The next killer doesn't care. He goes to TOPS. The Buffalo killer said he chose that store as it was unlikely he would run into a carrier. Of course, he ran into a security guard who was stymied by body armor. That leads folks to say: OH, NO - no armed citizen could have been useful.
Thus, this is great !! I don't have to fill in the reason section. More folks in tougher counties will get permits. AND - we can't use them everyday (if these laws go into effect).
The restrictions that are being proposed are all setting the stage for the Supreme Court to go nuclear and strike down all conceal carry license schemes.
Why Scotus didnt do that in Bruen is I feel they wanted to give may issue states a chance to toe the line and clearly New York has no intention of doing that and having a shall issue scheme in name only. The moral character nonsense and these numerous sensative areas are being abused and violate equal protection because we dont see in cities like Houston or Dallas or Chicago these types of laws.
If NY wants to play with fire they will get burned, so long as Scotus bas the will to burn them and I think, after overturning Roe and all the death threats, they will.
Yeah, I'd bet that most of us saw it coming that NY would tighten down as far as possible.15 hours of training, that will be hard for many people like the single mother in Harlem.
Also, ammunition background checks and banning carry on public transportation?
Wonder if these will be upheld.
https://www.thecity.nyc/2022/6/29/23188987/bruen-new-york-lawmakers-restrict-gun-access-legal
....
Agreed. This is huge.More big and excellent news:
Only if it ruled in our favor. Vacating and sending it back to the lower courts is completely normal, though. SCOTUS is (kind of) saying "Y'all got it wrong, so we're vacating your rulings. Here's a new rule. Try again."Wouldn't it have been better for SCOTUS to grant cert on the Assault Weapons ban and High Capacity Mag ban cases and rule on them forever solidifying the right to possess both?....
Yup, lower courts will definitely be busy with various 2A cases - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...r-aw-magazine-ban.905531/page-6#post-12340397We're watching history in the making gentlemen.
All that crap should get tossed at the first hearing. Clearly, New York doesn't get it.