SCOTUS Concealed Carry Case - NYSRPA v. Bruen — Decision … soon

[rplaw]

Thanks for correcting my ignorance. You must be an attorney. You offer NO reasonable solutions.

I have no LE experience - only military. So, I'm not qualified. I'll stay on the couch and send money to the RIGHT candidate.

So AOC, the bartending economist, is more qualified than you are?

Get off the couch.

[abinsinia]

https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20-843.html

Jul 19 2021 Amicus brief of The Buckeye Institute submitted.
Jul 19 2021 Amicus brief of Representative Claudia Tenney and 175 Additional Members of the U.S. House of Representatives submitted.
Jul 19 2021 Amicus brief of Law Enforcement Groups and State and Local Firearms Rights Groups submitted.
Jul 19 2021 Amicus brief of Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms submitted.
Jul 19 2021 Amicus brief of The DC Project Foundation; Operation Blazing Sword—Pink Pistols; Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership submitted.
Jul 19 2021 Amicus brief of Patrick J. Charles submitted.

[Paladin]

Supreme Court October arguments are set and NYSRPA is not one of them

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E6L2yXGW...g&name=900x900

The above was posted 08:15 am July 13, 2nd Tuesday of the month.

When will Nov orals schedule be available? August 10th, 2nd Tuesday of the month? August 13? Some other date?

[Foothills]

OMG Do I have to do this myself? I'll answer the question!

Do I call Michaels & ask them to file an amicus brief for me?

[Foothills]

The brief from the congresscritters is actually pretty good. They do a better job than I could of outlining the systematic racist origins of the NY law being challenged. And they quote Caetano like I suggest above. I think they did a good job of answering the question posed by the Court. May it carry the day!

[abinsinia]

Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of J. Joel Alicea submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of Second Amendment Foundation, et al. submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of American Constitutional Rights Union submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of The Cato Institute submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of The Firearms Policy Coalition and Professor Joyce Lee Malcolm submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of American Center for Law and Justice submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund submitted.

Everyone wants in on this case.

[Guninator]

You do realize Scalia has been dead for 5 years, we have 3 new conservative justices, and 5 extra years of lower court intermediate scrutiny BS, right?

Exactly. If the Court can do a 180 in 17 years in Lawrence v Texas, it can expand Heller in 13.

Again, the question really presented is: Why would a 6-3, more right leaning court than in 2008, vote for cert in this case? To limit Heller? Doesn't make sense.

[OCEquestrian]

Everyone wants in on this case.

So they can all claim "they" helped create the win to bolster their own fund raising efforts.

[wireless]

Exactly. If the Court can do a 180 in 17 years in Lawrence v Texas, it can expand Heller in 13.

Again, the question really presented is: Why would a 6-3, more right leaning court than in 2008, vote for cert in this case? To limit Heller? Doesn't make sense.

Actually the correct answer is to tell the court the state has the right to deny a concealed carry permit and that open carry is the protected right, especially since the question is, "Whether the State's denial of petitioners' applications for concealed-carry licenses for self-defense violated the Second Amendment."

Who cares that they clearly don't want to address open carry. Better to create precedent that concealed can generally be denied. Court composition, justice ages, current president, and the fact that conceal carry is the preferred form of carry for 90%+ of the population LOL. Something something precedent, dead Scalia said 13 years ago. Something something SEE HELLER.

In all seriousness, I am not a lawyer, but clearly when we put all of these factors together, outside of the strict "text, history, tradition" interpretation, the idea that open carry will be the protected right in this half of the 21st century is a joke.

[abinsinia]

Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of California Gun Rights Foundation submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of California Rifle & Pistol Association, Incorporated and Second Amendment Law Center, Inc submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of William English, Ph.D. and The Center for Human Liberty submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of Center for Defense of Free Enterprise, et al. submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of National Foundation for Gun Rights and National Association for Gun Rights submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of The Independent Institute submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of Ted Cruz, Mitch McConnell, John Barrasso, Marsha Blackburn, John Boozman, Mike Braun, John Cornyn, Tom Cotton, Kevin Cramer, Mike Crapo, Steve Daines, Josh Hawley, John Hoeven, Cindy Hyde-Smith, Jim Inhofe, Ron Johnson, James Lankford, Mike Lee, Cynthia Lummis, Roger Marshall, Jerry Moran, Jim Risch, Marco Rubio, Rick Scott, Thom Tillis submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of Madison Society Foundation, Inc. submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of Crime Prevention Resource Center submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of Asian Pacific American Gun Owners Association submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of Governor Greg Abbott submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of Second Amendment Law Professors submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of FPC American Victory Fund, Coalition of New Jersey Firearms Owners, San Diego County Gun Owners, Orange County Gun Owners, Riverside County Gun Owners, California County Gun Owners, and Knife Rights Foundation, Inc. submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of Lambert Henry, Russell Davenport, and Peter Fusco submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of THE LEAGUE FOR SPORTSMEN, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND DEFENSE submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of Korte Enterprises, LLC, d/b/a Korte Tree Care submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of Gun Owners of America, Inc., Gun Owners Foundation, and Heller Foundation submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of State of Arizona submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of Buckeye Firearms Association submitted.
Jul 20 2021 Amicus brief of The Goldwater Institute submitted.

gEEZ..

[Foothills]

It warms my heart...

gEEZ..

Ha ha - I know right?

I was puzzled that 175 Republican congresscritters filed a brief with zero Senators. Glad to see some Senators filing separately.

There's some other good ones referencing how critical the right to carry outside the home is critical for the self-defense of marginalized communities such as women and religious minorities in New York City. It was a nice touch pointing out how unsafe NYC is when people can't defend themselves.

I'm glad that Young filed his own brief, but wish he had answered the question directly since carry permit reasons apply to his case specifically and how the 9th treated him.

[Foothills]

Finally, the Senators answered the question. Thank you Ted Cruz!

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-843/184391/20210720143500686_AMICI%20BRIEF%20OF%20US%20SENATORS.pdf

[abinsinia]

Inside
Amicus brief of California Gun Rights Foundation

I found this paper quoted,

"Concealed Carry Through Common Use: Extending Heller’s Constitutional Construction"
Here http://www.gwlr.org/wp-content/uploa....-Rev.-284.pdf

This Note argues that the correct understanding of Heller’s cate-gorical standard of review leads to a Second Amendment right to con-cealed carry a handgun in public. When reviewing its next Second Amendment case, the Court should mirror its approach in Heller and engage in the process of constitutional construction to extend the“common use” test for “arms” to the question of “bearing” arms through the mode of concealed carry.

I haven't read the amici completely , but it may use some the argument.

EDIT: they didn't argue common use in that amici.

[ShadowGuy]

Ha ha - I know right?

I was puzzled that 175 Republican congresscritters filed a brief with zero Senators. Glad to see some Senators filing separately.

There's some other good ones referencing how critical the right to carry outside the home is critical for the self-defense of marginalized communities such as women and religious minorities in New York City. It was a nice touch pointing out how unsafe NYC is when people can't defend themselves.

I'm glad that Young filed his own brief, but wish he had answered the question directly since carry permit reasons apply to his case specifically and how the 9th treated him.

Take a look at: Amicus brief of California Rifle & Pistol Association, Incorporated and Second Amendment Law Center, Inc

They squarely address the absurdity of CA9 En Banc in their treatment of both Young and Peruta, in avoiding the question.

In sum, the Ninth Circuit has artificially construed carry-restriction challenges as narrowly requesting a specific form of carry, then analyzed each form of carry in a vacuum, and found no right to any specific form of carry. This piecemeal approach has allowed the Ninth Circuit to dodge the actual question presented in these cases: Does the Second Amendment protect some form of public carry? As a result, the Ninth Circuit’s holdings effectively mean that “while the Second Amendment may guarantee
the right to keep a firearm for self-defense within one’s home, it provides no right whatsoever to bear—i.e., to carry—that same firearm for self-defense in any other place.” Id. at 829 (O’Scannlain, J., dissenting). “In so holding, the [Ninth Circuit] reduces the right to ‘bear Arms’ to a mere inkblot.” Id.

[kuug]

Reading the briefs filed in the past few days I would hope the justices take great care to note the efforts used by lower courts to subvert the language in Heller and the efforts to limit second amendment questions to Rational Basis masquerading as Intermediate Scrutiny. The Supreme Court must create a hardline test for second amendment cases or the uniform disregard for the right will continue for another decade at minimum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk