N Y Case to be heard tomorrow

[robertrwalsh]

The possibly very significant case of N Y City Versus New York State Rifle and Pistol Association will be heard by SCOTUS tomorrow. At issue are the idiotic and draconian rules that the NYPD places (placed) on legal premesis handgun permit holders. The city is trying to weasle around a ruling by amending their rules and then declaring the issue is moot. The justices have agreed to hear the case anyway. The U. S. government has taken the official position that the issue is NOT moot because members of the NYSRPA could still attempt claims for damages against the "old" law. Approximately 50 amicus briefs have already been filed with the court in the case. It could be interesting.

[rednichols]

I know I'll be watching the case :-). Please keep us all up to date with your insights.

[bushmaster1313]

I heard about this case
Thanks for reminder that argument is today

Transcript of oral argument will be available here

Audio of the oral argument will be available here

Stay tuned boys and girls

[delcrossv]

Originally Posted by bushmaster1313

I heard about this case
Thanks for reminder that argument is today

Transcript of oral argument will be available here

Audio of the oral argument will be available here

Stay tuned boys and girls

I think the audio will be available Friday- based on this from the SCOTUS website:

"The audio recordings of all oral arguments heard by the Supreme Court of the United States are available to the public at the end of each argument week. The audio recordings are posted on Fridays after Conference."

[bushmaster1313]

Argument was heard at 10:00 AM today

Transcript could be available later today

[zogger]

Hoping we see SCOTUS ask strong questions of NYC lawyers

[bushmaster1313]

transcript here

[ladder13]

Leaked reports are that Roberts appears to be in sympathy with the court liberals. Not a big surprise.

[delcrossv]

Originally Posted by bushmaster1313

transcript here

Gorsuch and Alito delivered a serious whoopin' to Mr. Dearing (Respondent).

Quite entertaining!

[delcrossv]

Originally Posted by ladder13

Leaked reports are that Roberts appears to be in sympathy with the court liberals. Not a big surprise.

Roberts wasn't too bad here. He cut off Sotomayor. We really could use another Justice.

[zogger]

Thanks for the link!

[zogger]

I read the transcript. Some of my takeaways:

-Alito's "So if I stopped by to see my mother, that would not be allowed" question was brutal and spot on..

-The liberal judges aren't very bright and were in the tank

-All the assurances by the NYC lawyer about what would be enforced and not enforced were meaningless

-Too much discussion about suing for damages by the liberal judges.

-The question "Why don't the people just get carry licences?" was not answered. The reason is NYC carry licences (if you could get one) are not valid outside of NYC.

[bushmaster1313]

Transcript was very unsatisfying-Mostly about whether the case was moot.

Very disappointing was when NYC's attorney talked about the MAJORITY holding in Heller, Justice Breyer said ("you're correctly stating the
views of some judges.")

MR. DEARING: If history conclusively
shows that the restriction is impermissible,
then I -- I think -- as in Heller, Heller is an
example of that phenomenon. Heller determined
without consulting means and scrutiny, that
the -- that the law in question sort of went to
the core of and destroyed, in essence, the --
the -- the -- the Second Amendment right and,
therefore, was -- and more severe than any --
any historical, any analogous or prior law and
its degree of burden on the Second Amendment --
JUSTICE BREYER: No --
MR. DEARING: -- right.
JUSTICE BREYER: -- you're supposed to
do there, because you're correctly stating the
views of some judges.
MR. DEARING: Right.
JUSTICE BREYER: And some judges had
an opposite view.

[gman51]

Ginsberg opened the hearing asking why attorneys were arguing the case since NY changed the restrictions in the law. She asked what is left to discuss.
Maybe is any of the law constitutional could be a major discussion?

[bushmaster1313]

This is an admission that the original rule did not pass Intermediate Scrutiny:

And you did at one point, or someone
said I am a policeman, I happen to notice
there's a gun next to this person in the car who
stopped at the stoplight. I say, sir, what are
you doing with this gun? He says, I am going to
a firing range. Oh, I see. You're going to
test. Where is it?
Now if he says it's in Brooklyn, I can
find it. If he says it's somewhere 14 miles
northwest of Utica in the Adirondacks, I have a
harder time.
And I don't know who to believe. And
so it's tough. So there are more guns in New
York. What happened to that, that argument?
MR. DEARING: That argument is the --
is the argument that -- that is presented on the
record of the -- of the detective --
detective -- detective's affidavit, sorry.
We, of course, took a close look at
that question, and the police commissioner
determined that -- that the rule could be
repealed without a negative impact on public
safety.

[noshow]

I too, found the transcript to be disappointing with mootness being the main issue argued. But, after reading many of the reviews my "Google Alert" provided, I have become more confident/hopeful that relief may still be on the way.

[ladder13]

SCOTUS decides not to rule in this case. Kavanaugh urges his colleagues to take up a 2A case.


https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/27/supr...-a-decade.html

[oddshooter]

We lost a big one there. This was the most obvious Win we had.
Facts don't matter. NY promised not to do it again.

Cities can do what they want; then change the rules for a few months, and then change them back.

Two Justices are cowards. They refused to take a stance against the looney anti-2A Judges who think the Bill of Rights is just wrong.

NY manipulated the Supreme Court with lies because they wanted to be manipulated. We won't prosecute our bad law, but we don't want that to be law, just in case we change our minds.

Waiting for the Court to save us is wasting your time. They won't even back prior Supreme decisions thrown away by local liberal District judges.

RBG is no longer alive. They have her propped up in the corner until their political demands are met. So much for an independent court devoid of politics.

The Second Amendment must be protected at the ballot box as the last final word. Never trust the Courts. That game is rigged.

Who holds Judges accountable; other Judges. Which means nobody. Is that a broken, corrupt system or what?

[zogger]

Highly disappointting.

[delcrossv]

Roberts, as usual, is a "strict accomodationist".

[TTSH]

Originally Posted by zogger52

Highly disappointing.

... and then some.

[bushmaster1313]

Not a complete loss
The decision of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals was vacated.
Therefore the bad law in the 2nd Circuit decision is not law.
It's time for the Supreme Court to take up the New Jersey may issue case

supreme court decision is here

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., Et Al. v. City of New York | Mootness | Lawsuit

[schutzen-jager]

definitely a complete loss with no way of preventing reinstatement of previous restrictions - N.J. may issue has been has been fought + defeated for decades now , what makes anyone believe it will be any different now ? -

[bushmaster1313]

Originally Posted by schutzen-jager

definitely a complete loss with no way of preventing reinstatement of previous restrictions - N.J. may issue has been has been fought + defeated for decades now , what makes anyone believe it will be any different now ? -

Supreme Court let the appeal of the New Jersey may issue law sit in limbo since last May. Today, that case was distributed for Conference on May 1, and it is possible that the Supreme Court will agree to hear that appeal, which would be the very first time the Supreme Court has taken up that issue.

[schutzen-jager]

judging by attitude by justices on NYC case it will be another go nowhere case - until complete political + government change in this state nothing will change - the NRA + state associations have done nothing but accept donations + provide lip service here - the last thing the state association accomplished was using NJ members money to win a legal case in New Hampshire allowing CCW permits to be issued to out of state residents , so the association president could renew his ! - not one real efforts made here 30 + years since assault weapons ban - other organizations have made more efforts then NRA or state associations - the restrictions signed into law this past fall are an ongoing example of how government + politics work here -

[ladder13]

Court refuses all 2A cases.


Supreme Court again declines to take up Second Amendment cases - CNNPolitics


Supreme Court will not hear gun cases, blow to 2nd Amendment backers

[Jon651]

Originally Posted by robertrwalsh

The possibly very significant case of N Y City Versus New York State Rifle and Pistol Association will be heard by SCOTUS tomorrow. At issue are the idiotic and draconian rules that the NYPD places (placed) on legal premesis handgun permit holders. The city is trying to weasle around a ruling by amending their rules and then declaring the issue is moot. The justices have agreed to hear the case anyway. The U. S. government has taken the official position that the issue is NOT moot because members of the NYSRPA could still attempt claims for damages against the "old" law. Approximately 50 amicus briefs have already been filed with the court in the case. It could be interesting.

I have not been following this case. Are you stating that the NYSRPA is asking for REPARATIONS for something that was done to them under a law that no longer allows those actions? I think they might want to be careful in what they ask for...

I am very cautious when it comes to "The Law of Unintended Consequences"!