After Bruen, what happens to all the “held” cases?

[jcwatchdog]

[Foothills]

The Court has a conference tomorrow. Likely Monday they will issue orders. Many pending cases will receive GVR - Grant - Vacate - Remand, where they send the case back to the 9th Circuit (or other appeals courts) for further proceedings consistent with today's opinion.

[jcwatchdog]

The Court has a conference tomorrow. Likely Monday they will issue orders. Many pending cases will receive GVR - Grant - Vacate - Remand, where they send the case back to the 9th Circuit (or other appeals courts) for further proceedings consistent with today's opinion.

[stix213]

The biggest impact on these cases, is they can no longer be decided based on the 2A two step. No means-end scrutiny is allowed, including strict scrutiny. Either the law/regulation is consistent with historical regulation of the 2A from a time when the 2A was interpreted as an individual right to keep and bear arms, or it is unconstitutional. It is going to be entertaining watching the 9th try to wiggle out of this one.

Despite the popularity of this two-step approach, it is one
step too many. Step one of the predominant framework is
broadly consistent with Heller, which demands a test rooted
in the Second Amendment’s text, as informed by history.
But Heller and McDonald do not support applying means-end scrutiny in the Second Amendment context. Instead,
the government must affirmatively prove that its firearms
regulation is part of the historical tradition that delimits
the outer bounds of the right to keep and bear arms.

...

In sum, the Courts of Appeals’ second step is inconsistent
with Heller’s historical approach and its rejection of means-end scrutiny. We reiterate that the standard for applying
the Second Amendment is as follows: When the Second
Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the
Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. The government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating
that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of
firearm regulation. Only then may a court conclude that
the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.” Konigsberg, 366 U. S., at
50, n. 10.

[Bogart]

The case that launched a thousand 28(j)s.

[Bogart]

Also, Biden seems to have a good grasp of the details of the case. https://twitter.com/stillgray/status...dGBeZJUYU6S4-A

[ShadowGuy]

Also, Biden seems to have a good grasp of the details of the case. https://twitter.com/stillgray/status...dGBeZJUYU6S4-A

What an embarrassment.

[nick]

Also, Biden seems to have a good grasp of the details of the case. https://twitter.com/stillgray/status...dGBeZJUYU6S4-A

As usual Senile Joe is on top of things

[chris]

The biggest impact on these cases, is they can no longer be decided based on the 2A two step. No means-end scrutiny is allowed, including strict scrutiny. Either the law/regulation is consistent with historical regulation of the 2A from a time when the 2A was interpreted as an individual right to keep and bear arms, or it is unconstitutional. It is going to be entertaining watching the 9th try to wiggle out of this one.

The 9th and the state legislature will pull every single trick in the book to wiggle out of it.

[stag6.8]

I havent heard a peep from Newscum....hhmmm...yes his sorry @@@ is hiding... remember when he did all that grandstanding after Judge Benitez and the AWB being uncontitutional?..not his time!!!

[Helmut]

I havent heard a peep from Newscum....hhmmm...yes his sorry @@@ is hiding... remember when he did all that grandstanding after Judge Benitez and the AWB being uncontitutional?..not his time!!!

Looks like CA SB 918 is going to be amended to curtail this ruling.

[cleonard]

I havent heard a peep from Newscum....hhmmm...yes his sorry @@@ is hiding... remember when he did all that grandstanding after Judge Benitez and the AWB being uncontitutional?..not his time!!!

Oh no he has been front and center saying that they have new laws to be revealed next week to negate the decision. Many Tweets, has been on TV, etc.

[ProfChaos]

Looks like CA SB 918 is going to be amended to curtail this ruling.

They quote the 9th circus Young v Hawaii as grounds for regulating, yet that was determined using the 2-step method, which was stricken.

[Arrieta578]

I've been reading and listening to the legal scholars discuss the possible implications of this decision all day, but one thing has become clear:

Today’s decision is a major blow to the liberal ideology that the US Constitution is a “living document” that should be “interpreted” and "redefined" in accordance with the ever-evolving whims of modern society. Today’s decision is resounding “NO" to that ideology and reinforces the idea that the US Constitution should be interpreted and followed as "written" and subsequently "understood" within the historical contexts that the Founding Fathers set pen to paper.

[riderr]

SCOTUS set the new standard for deciding 2A cases. Yet, 9CA will find a way how to continue ruling anti-2A under the new standard. It's really not so difficult, since they purposely misinterpreted Heller and didn't even got a slap.