SCOTUS To Take On NY Transport Gun Ban

[morfeeis]

The lawsuit challenges New York City laws that restrict—unreasonably so, to the plaintiffs—the right of licensed New York handgun owners to carry their guns outside city limits. As I wrote back in 2014, the city's law "demonstrates the picayune restrictions on a core constitutional right that localities still indulge in after Heller—even when the laws in question will reduce the safety of citizen gun ownership, in this case by making gun training and practice more difficult

https://reason.com/blog/2019/01/22/supreme-court-to-consider-whether-new-yo

Let's hope this gets the ball rolling on smacking down some of this blatantly unconstitutional gun control laws...

 

[smithers599]

Very important case -- a "precursor" case to the ones that come after.
The goal is to get the SCOTUS to establish a "standard of review" for 2A cases. As the article points out, the lower courts are using "rational basis" (essentially, in practice, "if the city/state thinks it's OK, it's OK with us judges"). We all know it should be "strict scrutiny," (the city/state needs to show a compelling reason" but we hope for at least "intermediate scrutiny" ("the city/state needs to show a damn good reason"). As well, we need the SCOTUS to affirm that the 2A applies outside the home, because anti-gun judges are intentionally miscontruing Heller to limit the 2A to the home.

Once the standard of review is set, the next case to come along can be judged on that higher standard of review. The lawyers in this case have cleverly chosen to contest a statute that is just silly. (They use the term "picayune," which comes from the Latin pica meaning chicken and yune meaning feces.)

Thomas, Kananaugh and Alito are good. Gorsuch, although he is a blank slate on 2A, is probably going to take the conservative view. The four libs will vote against it, because they all dissented in Heller, and believe there is no individual RKBA, so how could NY violate a right which, in their minds, doesn't exist? That leaves Roberts, and he is squishy. "No Obama or Trump judges." Is he that naive, or that stupid? Or that compromised?

This will be a 5-4 case, with Roberts as the swing vote. Every case that comes after will depend on this one, and if Roberts goes lib, then there might not be any cases coming after, because without at least intermediate scrutiny, every other case will be doomed.

Buckle up. A lot riding on this one.

 

[samnev]

Squishy is being overly kind.

 

[Tim McBride]

RBG needs to retire so we can lock the court up solidly.

 

[smithers599]

Squishy is being overly kind.

As we were saying: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/feb/7/john-roberts-joins-liberal-justices-supreme-court-/

Roberts joins liberal justices as Supreme Court blocks Louisiana abortion clinic law

Roberts is not a guaranteed vote for the 2A. He is turning out to be more Souter/Kennedy than Scalia/Alito.

 

[Steve_In_29]

Roberts went from being openly hostile to Obama to being friendly....someone GOT to him. He is compromised goods now.