It was not my intent to break any forum rules; I was attempting to solicit knowledgeable opinions on any of the cases listed on the docket having to do with established case law. While I took the time to read the arguments and many of the amicus briefs of the now mooted NYS Rifle & Pistol case I know I don't have the time to research all 8 of the cases that may be reviewed. So I was requesting impartial legal opinions (Cliff's notes, if you will) on the prospective cases, the strength of the arguments, and what points of law the cases would hinge on should SCOTUS choose to review. I will endeavor to word my posts differently going forward.
Welcome to the THR
@De Facto,
Read the initial post at the beginning of this discussion thread and follow the link to the Scotus blog website. Scotus stands for Supreme Court Of The United States, and an an acronym like POTUS (President of the United States) and COTUS (Congress of the United States). This law blog focuses almost exclusively on the U.S. Supreme Court and keeps up with impending cases, links to resources such as petitions for court review, grants of those petitions, and oral arguments. It also does a good job reporting on the day to day operations of the court and does so for free to the general public. It is a far better source of legal information regarding Supreme Court cases than the media. Media coverage of the courts is usually extremely poor and this leads to public misunderstanding about the courts and their rulings. Scotus blog will also have from time to time online symposiums where scholars discuss in short summaries of developing areas of the law via recent or past cases.
The website link, that
@1942bull kindly provided above, has the firearm cert petitions lined up for readers with brief discussion of each one of them. Cert petitions are people who generally lost at the lower court level who petition the Supreme Court for consideration. Patrons of the website can then access the petitions, responses, court rulings, directly via Scotusblog links which shed light on the cases under consideration from the primary documents that the Supreme Court considers when hearing a case.
That is pretty much in a nutshell why this particular sub-forum focuses on the court decisions themselves and what they mean of the RKBA rather than popular opinion of them in a political or ideological sense. Practicing lawyers and those working under the law (which includes most firearm owners) need to know the impact of court rulings and changes in statutory law rather than considering whether those decisions or laws are subjectively "bad" or considered "unconstitutional" by 2A advocates. This subforum is for informed discussion, not opinion, of the law.
For example, in California, it doesn't matter whether or not California's ridiculous ammunition laws are "bad" or firearm owners consider them "unconstitutional" for firearm owners. It really does not matter that the news media covered Judge Benitez's decision on a preliminary injunction. What matters is that a specific district court judge issued an preliminary injunction order against California enforcing that law and the 9th Circuit subsequently issued a "stay" on the injunction going into force. Thus, California firearm owners and those seeking to purchase ammo in California must abide by those pernicious California statutes until a court decides otherwise or the California Legislature revokes them in a fit of sanity. Discussing the judicial orders and opinions in the specific case and what it means for firearm owners in California and overall in the RKBA legal arena is what the focus will be in the Legal subforum of the THR.
Thus, this subforum of the THR website is more geared toward posts like the following--this is a new law--what does it mean for those who have to follow it or this is a new court decision--what does that mean for people. Or as 1942bull did, these cases may be considered for Supreme Court review affecting the RKBA. Sometimes there will be specific questions about a state's law or those of several states where someone may be traveling. Sometimes people move from one state to another but want to know what to expect of firearm laws. There are also frequent questions about laws surrounding buying and selling of these.
On these Legal subforum posts, a political or emotional take on the law(s) discussed is basically useless in terms of keeping someone out of jail for violating the law or preventing some other legal jeopardy. This subforum does not rely on anecdotes about how cousin Billy Bob who was a constable in Peanut Town did not enforce that law or interpreted it in some dubious way. Instead, you are encouraged to post the actual statute or decision and attempt some way to translate the language (which can be arcane) of the statute or decision into commonly understood terms for the laymen.
Lawyers are standing by, (just kidding Frank and Spats), to give you general legal guidance in how police, judges, and juries, might view those particular statues or rulings in an objective sense. In addition, law is somewhat like a set of nesting boxes. Laws and court decisions came about through specific historical conditions and facts. Many times, the law or a court ruling by itself makes little or no sense by itself than a stray brick gives a picture of the house it came from. A doctrine of law is built by many bricks and built over time and it can take time to understand how each individual brick contributes to the whole structure.
In addition, some people foolishly or evilly encourage or discuss their own illegal actions based on their beliefs that a law is unconstitutional or not likely to be prosecuted. These people are stupid as this is an open forum and we do have law enforcement members who can readily determine through subpoenas who these people are and investigate accordingly. Nevertheless, they won't last long (sometimes even MINUTES!) on the THR because encouraging illegal behavior is the last sort of thing that is The High Road way.
Far too frequently, people get upset about their posts being deleted because they want to vent on this Legal subforum or they want the law to conform to their particular notions of what is fair or represents justice to them. Some simply bring in peripheral topics that have no bearing on whether a law applies or not or simply wish to argue with someone else. This sub topic is not for that.
If you want to discuss a decision in political terms, the General discussions forum is a better place for that. If you wish to discuss a court or jury decision regarding self defense laws, then Strategies and Tactics is designed, in part, to investigate how a person should consider a ruling or statute in accords with planning tactical responses before you are in the middle of a potential conflict.
