Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: NRA Takes Carry Case to SCOTUS

  1. #1
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northern Virginia

    NRA Takes Carry Case to SCOTUS

    The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) has partnered with the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association (NYSRPA) today to ask the Supreme Court to hear a challenge to New York’s restrictive process for issuing concealed carry licenses.

    "As long as New York continues denying law-abiding gun owners their Second Amendment rights, the NRA will continue fighting to protect and expand those rights," said Jason Ouimet, executive director of NRA-ILA.

    https://www.nraila.org/articles/2020...case-to-scotus

    Here's hoping that this one is finally the one.

  2. #2
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    In legal terms, it seems "proper cause" is different than "May Issue".... Or is it essentially the same given NY law?? eg, may issue relies on proper cause.

    Good Hunting @joshs !!!

    Name:  patriot.gif
Views: 731
Size:  238 Bytes
    "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776

  3. #3
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by RoyGBiv View Post
    In legal terms, it seems "proper cause" is different than "May Issue".... Or is it essentially the same given NY law?? eg, may issue relies on proper cause.

    Good Hunting @joshs !!!

    Name:  patriot.gif
Views: 731
Size:  238 Bytes
    Same thing. Some "may issue" states use "good cause," some use "proper cause," and others require an applicant to be a "proper person to be licensed." They all mean that the government can discriminate against individuals to deny them of their fundamental rights.
    Last edited by joshs; 12-17-2020 at 04:48 PM.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Louisiana
    I’m very much more hopeful in the courts than in Congress restoring our rights.

    Good luck, and thanks!
    Per the PF Code of Conduct, I have a commercial interest in the StreakTM product as sold by Ammo, Inc.

  5. #5
    Hokey / Ancient JAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Kansas City
    Money sent, good hunting!

  6. #6
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Illinois
    If NY feels that this may emdanger the existence of restrictive CCW permits nationwide do you think they will reverse current laws to try to render it moot?

    Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

  7. #7
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Southwest Pennsylvania

    NRA Takes Carry Case to SCOTUS

    Quote Originally Posted by 45dotACP View Post
    If NY feels that this may emdanger the existence of restrictive CCW permits nationwide do you think they will reverse current laws to try to render it moot?

    Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk
    Doing so should not be enough to render the case moot, but I could potentially see a court that prefers to dodge the issue agreeing with this approach.

    I would really like to see this case get decided on the merits given the current make up of the court. The results could potentially be really good.



    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Any legal information I may post is general information, and is not legal advice. Such information may or may not apply to your specific situation. I am not your attorney unless an attorney-client relationship is separately and privately established.

  8. #8
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    PA
    Quote Originally Posted by BillSWPA View Post
    Doing so should not be enough to render the case moot, but I could potentially see a court that prefers to dodge the issue agreeing with this approach.

    I would really like to see this case get decided on the merits given the current make up of the court. The results could potentially be really good.



    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    I think @BillSWPA is right on both points. Though I’m hopeful for some better 2A jurisprudence now that Justice Barrett is on the court, I suspect we’ll see incremental change for the next couple of terms. I think the cases I’m paying the most attention to are the gun-rights-restoration for non-violent felons. See Folajtar v. US. Judge Bibas’ dissent in this case mirrored in many ways an opinion then-judge Barrett wrote while she was on the 7th Circuit.

  9. #9
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by jrbway View Post
    I think @BillSWPA is right on both points. Though I’m hopeful for some better 2A jurisprudence now that Justice Barrett is on the court, I suspect we’ll see incremental change for the next couple of terms. I think the cases I’m paying the most attention to are the gun-rights-restoration for non-violent felons. See Folajtar v. US. Judge Bibas’ dissent in this case mirrored in many ways an opinion then-judge Barrett wrote while she was on the 7th Circuit.
    I hope you're right that the Court is willing to take a crack at prohibited persons categories, but I'm not sure the votes are there. Neither Alito or Roberts joined Thomas' dissent in Voisine v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2272 (2016).

    Why don't you think carry is the next incremental change they want to address? There is a clear circuit split, and when 11 2A cases were before the court last year for cert. at the same time, it was a carry case that drew a dissent from denial. Rogers v. Grewal, 140 S. Ct. 1865 (2020).

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by 45dotACP View Post
    If NY feels that this may emdanger the existence of restrictive CCW permits nationwide do you think they will reverse current laws to try to render it moot?

    Quote Originally Posted by BillSWPA View Post
    Doing so should not be enough to render the case moot, but I could potentially see a court that prefers to dodge the issue agreeing with this approach.

    I would really like to see this case get decided on the merits given the current make up of the court. The results could potentially be really good.



    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Didn't that happen with this case—

    https://www.scotusblog.com/case-file...york-new-york/

    —last year?

    Unless I misunderstood—and perhaps I did—what happened in NYSR&PA v. City of New York, SCOTUS vacated NYSR&PA v. City of New York last April because the city withdrew the regulation that prohibited NYC residents with “premises” handgun licenses from taking their own legally-owned firearms outside for lawful purposes at some prior point in time.

    So, ASSuming that I understood correctly what happened in the prior case of NYSR&PA v. City of New York, what would prohibit the court from ''punting'' again?

    I'd enjoy seeing a really desirable outcome, but won't believe it until I see it.
    ''Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity.'' ―Albert Einstein

    Full disclosure per the Pistol-Forum CoC: I am the author of Quantitative Ammunition Selection.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •