Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion Discuss national gun rights and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1801  
Old 12-10-2019, 8:43 AM
Robotron2k84's Avatar
Robotron2k84 Robotron2k84 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 957
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Opinion released today did not concern NYSRPA, just FYI.

Another opinion is due tomorrow, as well.
Reply With Quote
  #1802  
Old 12-10-2019, 8:59 AM
champu's Avatar
champu champu is offline
NRA Member, CRPA Member,
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Redondo Beach
Posts: 1,082
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sputnik View Post
I don't think New York ever admitted that it's law is/was unconstitutional. They have tried very hard to admit no wrongdoing whatsoever. To hear them you'd think the change was out of the goodness of their hearts and a desire to do right by their fellow New Yorkers.
The closest they come to admitting wrongdoing is on page 52...

Quote:
3 JUSTICE ALITO: Mr. Dearing, are the
4 -- are people in New York less safe now as a
5 result of the enactment of the new city and
6 state laws than they were before?
7 MR. DEARING: We -- we -- no, I donít
8 think so. We made a judgment expressed by our
9 police commissioner that -- that it was
10 consistent with public safety to repeal the
11 prior rule and to move forward without it.
12 JUSTICE ALITO: Well, if they're not
13 less safe, then what possible justification
14 could there have been for the old rule, which
15 you have abandoned?
16 MR. DEARING: It was a reasonable --
17 as we've outlined in our briefs, it was a
18 reasonable implementation of the -- of the state
19 premises license, carry license division. I
20 think -- and we've explained that there was --
21 was a verification benefit to the way that that
22 rule was set up. That verification benefit
23 perhaps has not played out as much in practice
24 as it had been predicted
...and the reason I say that is because their rationale for changing the law canít be reconciled with the timing of their change in the law. There was no coincidental study being performed that happened to conclude shortly after cert was granted and reveal that the rules didnít help public safety. That information has been known to them throughout this court case, which means their defense of the rules all the way up through grant of cert had been in bad faith.

On the other hand, as I think about that, the above excerpt is an admission that reinstating the rules wouldnít survive heightened scrutiny and might be considered by the court to be a reasonably strong promise not to do so.
Reply With Quote
  #1803  
Old 12-10-2019, 9:16 AM
champu's Avatar
champu champu is offline
NRA Member, CRPA Member,
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Redondo Beach
Posts: 1,082
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vaka View Post
Would the 9th take the chance of sending back with a more balanced 9th circuit and get and even more friendly panel of judges ?
Like I said, it will depend on if and what language comes out of this case.

The Ninth is not going to tee up a defiant en banc decision for a SCOTUS appeal if SCOTUS shows an intent to really defend the second amendment here. That would be fast-tracking an ultimate loss. They are better off kicking the boulder back to the bottom of the hill. Even if the Circuit has a few more conservative judges on it, the odds are still in their favor of having a majority when the case inevitably ends up en banc again. This will take significant time and it may give them another roll of the dice on SCOTUS composition.

But anyway thatís a different case and, while theyíre currently related, I donít want to derail this thread too much.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:49 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.