"UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE FALL" > NYS SAFE ACT

U.S. Supreme Court Ruling on NY Carry Permit Case

(1/3) > >>

JayBay:
Has anybody heard what the results or the trend of opinion on the SCOTUS question about local county level judges refusing issuance of concealed carry permits to citizens with a clean background? 

GrizG:
From listening to the oral arguments it appears to me that a majority of the justices view NY's "may issue" permit system that allows restrictions (e.g., carry to, from and while hunting, fishing, hiking) or outright denial if "all you want it for is self defense" to be problematic. Some justices were very clear that self defense is a valid reason for carrying.  Some justices were also uncomfortable with local authorities controlling the exercise of a right affirmed in the Bill of Rights. Several were concerned about unrestricted carry in "sensitive areas" like crowded sports stadiums.

I don't see them doing away with the carry permits and forcing "Constitutional Carry" on NY, nor do I see them endorsing open carry in NY (the Kens and Karens would have 911 over loaded!). It is more likely that a "shall issue" system may be forced on NY (i.e., carry permits without restrictions) with the issue of "sensitive areas" perhaps left undefined by SCOTUS. There are Federal restrictions such as post offices that would still be in force and others could be added via legislation instead of local discretion (which could be challenged in court!).

Carry permits themselves would seem to pass the "reasonable controls" standards. I think we all endorse the notion of keeping guns out of the hands of those adjudicated dangerously mentally ill and violent convicted felons. Age... perhaps harder to justify 'aged 21 or older' but that will likely stand.

We likely will not see a ruling until late winter or the spring of 2022. As such, for now this is all speculation. Specultion based on the oral arguments and my involvement at the national level with the researchers and Constitutional scholars that got us to Heller v. District of Columbia and a better understanding of guns in society. Don B. Kates Jr. spear headed that research effort and recruited me... To my knowledge Kates was the first Constitutional scholar to argue that Article 2 conveyed an individual right and not a collective right (militia). He was a very interesting guy and we owe him eternal gratefulness for his foresight and perseverance in getting us to Heller. Finding a "pure second amendment case" was very difficult. In the 90s I was passing possibilities on to Don for his review and every one of them had some other aspect upon which SCOTUS could rule... Heller was the first case found that was a pure second amendment case. Don was confident that we'd win such a case and then there would be 10-20 years of court cases defining "reasonable controls."   New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen is one of those cases.

gdk45:
The ruling is expected in June.

If you want to listen to the oral arguments you can here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdj3wtnm_7o

JayBay:
Thanks for the replies - I just got back to my computer and thank you for thorough replies - very helpful

grazan:
THE RULING TODAY WAS IN FAVOR OF THE GUN OWNERS NOT THE STATE

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page