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
  #2281  
Old 05-26-2022, 6:17 PM
MajorCaliber MajorCaliber is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,004
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by librarian72 View Post
How could you forget (toxic) masculinity being a mental health problem?!??! It's even listed.... You made it in 1.
Yes, that also fits in the chain reasoning as well as being lighter than a duck.
__________________
I wish today's liberals could understand: You cannot be generous by giving away other peoples' money and you cannot demonstrate your virtue by your willingness to give up other peoples' rights.

The more time I spend on this forum, the more sense kcbrown makes.
Reply With Quote
  #2282  
Old 05-26-2022, 10:19 PM
Foothills Foothills is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 376
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default Amici!

Quote:
Originally Posted by stoogescv View Post
I think an Equal Protection challenge would have to identify a disadvantaged class of people. For example, if NY was granting permits to white applicants but not black applicants. I don't think there's anything in the record that would provide a basis for that (or other protected class such as sex or religion), so I don't think there is any way for the court to grant relief to the plaintiffs on the basis of Equal Protection. I would not be surprised if some of the opinions include something in their discussion of the history of gun control referencing the fact that many gun control restrictions were aimed at keeping the newly freed slaves from being armed, but that would not amount to an Equal Protection challenge to this current NY statute.
Organizations representing all those groups filed amicus briefs asserting that NY’s law as implemented deliberately discriminated against their demographic group in favor of wealthy, politically-connected elites. There are many landmark cases where SCOTUS cites an amicus brief in their opinion. This is true even if the parties to the case didn’t address that issue specifically.

They wouldn’t allow amicus briefs if they were limiting their analysis to arguments briefed by the parties. That is relevant at the District court level. Many landmark rulings deviate significantly from what was discussed in the initial trial.

Look at NAACP vs. Claiborne Hardware. The NAACP kept losing until the end of the appeals process. The Constitutional and Common Law issues changed quite a bit as it moved up the various court levels. The hardware store initially won its tort claim in state court.
Reply With Quote
  #2283  
Old 05-27-2022, 7:29 AM
spike90049's Avatar
spike90049 spike90049 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 141
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wireless View Post
It could affect cases that are being held, but I don't think it'll change this opinion much or at all.
Agreed. They aren't going to emotionally respond by changing legal opinions.

We already know where the leftist zealot judges will rule so those sure aren't changing.
Reply With Quote
  #2284  
Old 05-27-2022, 11:10 AM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,196
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foothills View Post
Organizations representing all those groups filed amicus briefs asserting that NY’s law as implemented deliberately discriminated against their demographic group in favor of wealthy, politically-connected elites. There are many landmark cases where SCOTUS cites an amicus brief in their opinion. This is true even if the parties to the case didn’t address that issue specifically.

They wouldn’t allow amicus briefs if they were limiting their analysis to arguments briefed by the parties. That is relevant at the District court level. Many landmark rulings deviate significantly from what was discussed in the initial trial.

Look at NAACP vs. Claiborne Hardware. The NAACP kept losing until the end of the appeals process. The Constitutional and Common Law issues changed quite a bit as it moved up the various court levels. The hardware store initially won its tort claim in state court.
The law changing is one thing, but an equal protection claim must rely on evidence in the record. That claim not having been asserted, there s no evidence to support it now.
Reply With Quote
  #2285  
Old 05-27-2022, 8:41 PM
homelessdude homelessdude is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: inland empire
Posts: 1,462
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I have read everything out there and in my opinion it won't stop at red flag laws.
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 6:57 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, 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 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy

Tactical Pants Tactical Boots Military Boots 5.11 Tactical