Chance of this being the next 2nd Amendment SCOTUS case?

[Aim1]

With the addition of Justice Kavanaugh SCOTUS seems to have enough votes to take 2nd Amendment cases and more importantly the willingness to.

From the article:

"Having reached the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, the case is now just one step away from the U.S. Supreme Court.

The high court, however, would have to grant leave for it to be considered, meaning four of the nine justices would have to agree to hear it."

(Never heard of 'grant leave'.......)


What is the chance of this becoming the next 2nd Amendment SCOTUS case?





https://www.wgrz.com/article/news/l...-city/71-66c08762-5a7a-43df-9d89-58b75642f4e3

 

[The Liberal]

I think a pistol permit is overreaching and unconstitutional and I hope the suit is successful. I would also like to see carry permits normalized and far more accessible. However, I do think there is something to be said for limiting who can own a gun legally and the types of weapons private citizens can own without significant additional screening.

 

[748]

Maybe the state should require the criminals get a pistol permit....
I think they were applying the law to the wrong people.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I think a pistol permit is overreaching and unconstitutional and I hope the suit is successful. I would also like to see carry permits normalized and far more accessible. However, I do think there is something to be said for limiting who can own a gun legally and the types of weapons private citizens can own without significant additional screening.

But who will make the rules? If politicians do it, the rules will be based on whims and the political climate of the moment. If bureaucrats do it, we will be faced with arbitrary rules by unaccountable authorities.

Why not just follow the Constitution? There are states that do that -- and surprise! surprise! nothing bad happens.

 

[AlexanderA]

I think a pistol permit is overreaching and unconstitutional and I hope the suit is successful.

Under the rationale of the Heller case, pistol permits would be constitutional as long as they were granted routinely and not denied arbitrarily. (Think of that as a sort of pre-screening that does no more than a NICS check.) It does appear, though, that the New York system is too arbitrary to pass muster.

(Never heard of 'grant leave'.......)

The more precise term is issuing a writ of certiorari.

 

[guyfromohio]

I don't trust that Roberts will go towards the 2A.

 

[Tommygunn]

I think a pistol permit is overreaching and unconstitutional and I hope the suit is successful. I would also like to see carry permits normalized and far more accessible. However, I do think there is something to be said for limiting who can own a gun legally and the types of weapons private citizens can own without significant additional screening.

Here we go again.
We all know you don't like the fact we can buy AR15s at our local Academy Sports. Can't you just address the original topic without gratuitous assertions of "that which we already know?????"

 

[Aim1]

I don't trust that Roberts will go towards the 2A.

That worries me to. He has sided with the liberals in 2 recent cases.

 

[crestoncowboy]

Lol. Ignore them and they go away.

As far as the case goes, who knows. I believe they draw their cases from a hat these days.

 

[Jack B.]

If NY were to come out on the losing end of this. They will just ignore the courts findings

 

[Kaybee]

p.s. The left lovesss to point out when conservatives do racist stuff, but this NY pistol permit includes a $300+ biannual fee that was specifically intended to target low income people in the black community. Many people that committed no other crimes were turned into criminals and charged by this law. It's racist as hell, but they are quiet about that aspect of it.

Which is a dang shame, because low income people are often the ones stuck in a bad neighborhood. Wealthy people can move to a nicer place.

 

[The Liberal]

If there is to be a permit, it ought to be free and shall-issue. The biannual fee reeks of a poll tax and seems to threaten lawfully owned property. If it is considered real property and this subject to property taxes, it stands to reason the state would be unable to tell you you can’t own it, and if it’s a registration fee like a motor vehicle, it also stands to reason that that registration would buy the ability to lawfully possess and carry (operate?) the property in public. Mix in the constitutional guarantee of a right to self defense and RKBA and I don’t see how the NY law is constitutional.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

p.s. The left lovesss to point out when conservatives do racist stuff, but this NY pistol permit includes a $300+ biannual fee that was specifically intended to target low income people in the black community. Many people that committed no other crimes were turned into criminals and charged by this law. It's racist as hell, but they are quiet about that aspect of it.

"Gun Control" is at its heart racist. It was originally intended to disarm Blacks in the South for the protection of the Ku Klux Klan. Grant, in listing the crimes of the KKK included "depriving Colored people of the right to bear arms."

 

[The Liberal]

"Gun Control" is at its heart racist. It was originally intended to disarm Blacks in the South for the protection of the Ku Klux Klan. Grant, in listing the crimes of the KKK included "depriving Colored people of the right to bear arms."

true, but this isn’t about tgat

 

[Vern Humphrey]

true, but this isn’t about tgat

Actually, it is. It is the perpetuation of a policy designed to suppress and disenfranchise a large segment of the population. And that hasn't changed since Reconstruction.

 

[denton]

2.8%.

That is the percent of cases SCOTUS accepts.

Ramble.... You can really ruin your reputation as a prognosticator by predicting what SCOTUS will do. That said, SCOTUS has already accepted a case against New York City. Their law is that you cannot transport a firearm out of the city, or to any place in the city other than shooting ranges. My guess is that they will find that the right to bear arms guarantees the right to carry a firearm from place to place. If that happens, we are well positioned to take on situations like California where open carry is prohibited and concealed carry is rarely granted, effectively denying the right to bear arms to almost everyone. So watch carefully what happens in New York City.

 

[Enfielder]

"Gun Control" is at its heart racist. It was originally intended to disarm Blacks in the South for the protection of the Ku Klux Klan. Grant, in listing the crimes of the KKK included "depriving Colored people of the right to bear arms."

You forgot the California ban on open carry to keep the Black Panthers unarmed. Thanks Ronald Reagan.

 

[Enfielder]

I moved to Central NY 20 years ago from Pa. I had a meager collection of guns. I moved to Vermont 12 years ago and then moved back to CNY three years ago.
I remember being on vacation and seeing a shotgun news with some amazing deals on the cover when I was living in Vt.
In conjunction with Vermonts loose gun laws, so started a long and fruitful buying spree of long and hand guns and I carried everywhere it was legal.
I'm not a law breaker. I served the public on a professional level. My record is clean.
Moving back to NY, I had to leave my pistols behind and my AR never made it across the border. It took 8 months after I applied to actually get my permit just to possess what I already owned legally. If I had lived one county over, I would not have gotten the permit as they arbitrarily don't hand out permits, and if they do, it takes years. That is infringement in my book. I hope this law is stuck down and NY gets its dick spanked. I am pro 2A and I see the issue with people getting shot up for no reason. I believe that some people should not own guns but the rights of all should not suffer because of the few.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

You forgot the California ban on open carry to keep the Black Panthers unarmed. Thanks Ronald Reagan.

As I said, "gun control" is fundamentally racist.

 

[stillquietvoice]

If NY were to come out on the losing end of this. They will just ignore the courts findings

Mix in the constitutional guarantee of a right to self defense and RKBA and I don’t see how the NY law is constitutional.

I moved to Central NY 20 years ago from Pa. I had a meager collection of guns. I moved to Vermont 12 years ago and then moved back to CNY three years ago.
I remember being on vacation and seeing a shotgun news with some amazing deals on the cover when I was living in Vt.
In conjunction with Vermonts loose gun laws, so started a long and fruitful buying spree of long and hand guns and I carried everywhere it was legal.
I'm not a law breaker. I served the public on a professional level. My record is clean.
Moving back to NY, I had to leave my pistols behind and my AR never made it across the border. It took 8 months after I applied to actually get my permit just to possess what I already owned legally. If I had lived one county over, I would not have gotten the permit as they arbitrarily don't hand out permits, and if they do, it takes years. That is infringement in my book. I hope this law is stuck down and NY gets its dick spanked. I am pro 2A and I see the issue with people getting shot up for I reason. I believe that some people should not own guns but the rights of all should not suffer because of the few.

I have lived in NY my whole life,sorry to say, the state law is a direct violation of federal law. The federal government does not require a permit to use or possess pistols. The way the state law is written it establishes categories. One is for having a pistol in your home, another is for FFLfor sale in their business, another is for carrying as part of your job and the last is for blanket carry for self defense. This is a state issued permit but has to be signed by a county judge.
Problem here is tiresome counties think they have the right to alter state law and add restrictions also when a person files for a permit that individual has to sign a waiver stating that the state has a right to revoke permit for any reason.

These issues are a major violation of federal law making the state law illegal it violates 2a. But challenging this is too costly for the average citizen to undertake.
Scotia should rule against NYC and by doing so should revoke the whole plot system to boot.

 

[CapnMac]

These things are never as simple, nor a cut and dried, as they presented in the popular press (and, often only as clear as mud in specialist press).
The carry case might be better for our larger community, but, only if it addresses, more precisely the need for higher scrutiny on all gun law (and not merely contested laws). Or, if it addresses those polities which ignore the applicability inferred by McDonald. (Or, for that matter how DC has thumbed its nose are Heller.)

As pointed out above, the likelihood of SC taking up two NYC cases is slim, very slim. And, the one in OP would have to be deccided at the appellate level first.

The current SC does have a tilt toward constructionalists, a general good for us al. This in neither pro nor anti gun per se. The smart people I have talked to say that the smart money is on SC taking up the situation where the different Circuits each seem to rue unto themselves. But, the WAGing after that is split. There's nothing specifically in the Constitution that require the Circuits to mind each other's Ps & Qs. But, the 14th, which is established costitutiona canon, does require that laws be uniform across all of the States and Polities. Which is not the case when the Circuits decide things only within their perviews. Which is very muc hthe sort of the the SC is meant to take up.

Yawn, so? Well, if the Circuits are expected to rule uniformly, should not the States also practice at least some similar uniformity? We here are clever, several will have gotten ahead of my line of reasoning and applied it to concealed carry and the like.

Maybe. Perhaps. Closed river aon professional course.

 

[boom boom]

Actually, sometimes the Supreme Court grants cert in a number of related cases if they anticipate a major change in the law. That way, related cases can be reversed and remanded without opinion based on the seminal case. But, sometimes they don't.

 

[MidRoad]

I have lived in NY my whole life,sorry to say, the state law is a direct violation of federal law. The federal government does not require a permit to use or possess pistols. The way the state law is written it establishes categories. One is for having a pistol in your home, another is for FFLfor sale in their business, another is for carrying as part of your job and the last is for blanket carry for self defense. This is a state issued permit but has to be signed by a county judge.
Problem here is tiresome counties think they have the right to alter state law and add restrictions also when a person files for a permit that individual has to sign a waiver stating that the state has a right to revoke permit for any reason.

These issues are a major violation of federal law making the state law illegal it violates 2a. But challenging this is too costly for the average citizen to undertake.
Scotia should rule against NYC and by doing so should revoke the whole plot system to boot.

It's ridiculous. My dad is a prime example. Lived in n Rensselaer county most of his life ,had an restricted permit for over 20 years. Moved to Albany county about ten years ago. Updates his permits and restrictions are put in it buy the judge. Every time he buys a new handgun he turns the amendment form in along with a letter requesting the restrictions be removed. Which makes at least 3 or more times now in the last five years. The judge refuses to removes the restrictions and states he needs to provide a better reason why he should have no restrictions. So legally all he can do is store the handguns in his home , and transport them for hunting and target shooting. Twenty years no problems and the right to defend one self while understanding and carrying in full compliance of the law just isnt good enough for that judge.....

 

[The Liberal]

And of course the state bears no responsibility or culpability for your safety.

 

[GEM]

The continuing horror show of such laws indicate why Heller was not the great practical success it seemed at first. Theoretical success as to having some right to arms, perhaps but except maybe for Illinois, I see little on the ground effect.

The NY laws should have been wiped out as was the case in other grand social issue cases such as in the Civil Rights issues.

Oh, hey - Donald and McConnell - where is your action agenda to promote the RKBA? Not to say you defend it - send a check. But doing something positive. You were all over tax cuts for your buddies and Obama care, build the WALL, but helping out your RKBA supporters - hear the crickets.