Supreme Court Takes First 2A Case in a Decade

[45Doll 5,877]

So if NJ enacts the bill preventing you from defending yourself in your own house, you'll get to carry outside and do it?

"Excuse me Mister Home Invader. Would you mind stepping out onto my veranda?"

The irony is ludicrous.

[marlintag 223]

13 minutes ago, 45Doll said:

So if NJ enacts the bill preventing you from defending yourself in your own house, you'll get to carry outside and do it?

"Excuse me Mister Home Invader. Would you mind stepping out onto my veranda?"

The irony is ludicrous.

C'mon really? I think you know the answer. 

27 minutes ago, JohnnyB said:

We may get the ruling tomorrow morning on the 2A case. I don't see the general public caring so much about this case.  Roe V. Wade will bring a huge outcry though!

True! The media is hyper focused on SCOTUS overturning Roe possibly, very little attention to this groundbreaking case.

[Bklynracer 1,265]

14 minutes ago, marlintag said:

True! The media is hyper focused on SCOTUS overturning Roe possibly, very little attention to this groundbreaking case.

Once announced if in our favor, There will be lots (tons) of attention.

[JohnnyB 4,325]

1 hour ago, Bklynracer said:

Once announced if in our favor, There will be lots (tons) of attention.

Somehow I doubt it!  All the attention is on Roe!

[1LtCAP 4,262]

11 hours ago, JohnnyB said:

Somehow I doubt it!  All the attention is on Roe!

i haven't read the whole thing...but there's an article in todays courier post. i didn't get caught at enough traffic lights to read the whole thing yet though.

[CMJeepster 2,778]

When the Supreme Court rules on NY gun laws, how will NJ's strict laws be affected? (yahoo.com)

[CMJeepster 2,778]

Major Second Amendment case awaiting Supreme Court decision (yahoo.com)

"There's been a big push to get more Second Amendment cases before the courts because many people believe that the lower courts were not being faithful to the Supreme Court's decision in 2010 saying that states, as well as the federal government, were restricted by the Second Amendment," Seth Chandler, a professor at the University of Houston Law Center who teaches constitutional law, told ABC News. "The Supreme Court for the past 10 years or so has just not placed that hot-button issue on its docket. But now, with this New York State Rifle and Pistol v. Bruen case, they've accepted those challenges."

[raz-0 1,259]

Just now, CMJeepster said:

Major Second Amendment case awaiting Supreme Court decision (yahoo.com)

It will be the last day, just like every 2a case before it. Every article not reporting the decision is just click bait. 

[marlintag 223]

9 hours ago, raz-0 said:

It will be the last day, just like every 2a case before it. Every article not reporting the decision is just click bait. 

They are leaving the best for last! 

[JohnnyB 4,325]

We will have our answer tomorrow morning!  Keep your fingers crossed!

[DirtyDigz 1,812]

BRUEN DECISION IS OUT!!!

 

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf

Quote

Held: New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth
Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-de-
fense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and
bear arms in public for self-defense.

 

[raz-0 1,259]

2 minutes ago, DirtyDigz said:

BRUEN DECISION IS OUT!!!

 

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf

 

I am shocked it wasn't the last day. This is officially me eating crow. Now I gotta read it. 

[JohnnyB 4,325]

 

YAY!!!!!!!!!

[DirtyDigz 1,812]

Uploading the decision PDF here in case SCOTUSblog server gets overwhelmed:

 

Bruen_Decision.pdf

[NJRulz 82]

6-3! (i thought roberts was going to dissent)

The New York "proper cause" requirement violates the Constitution, Thomas explains, because it only allows public-carry licenses when an applicant shows a special need for self-defense.

 

 

[DirtyDigz 1,812]

Quote

The court rejects the "two-part" approach used by the courts of appeals in Second Amendment cases. "In keeping with Heller," Thomas writes, "we hold that when the Second Amendment's plain text covers an individual's conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct."

 

[NJRulz 82]

The court rejects the "two-part" approach used by the courts of appeals in Second Amendment cases. "In keeping with Heller," Thomas writes, "we hold that when the Second Amendment's plain text covers an individual's conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct."

[DirtyDigz 1,812]

I wouldn't want to be Phil Murphy's dog today...

[JohnnyB 4,325]

The PRNJ can now shove their "Justifiable Need" up their ass!

[NJRulz 82]

The Thomas opinion indicates that it is "settled" that places like polling places and courthouses "were 'sensitive places' where arms carrying could be prohibited consistent with the Second Amendment." And courts can analogize to simliar sensitive places, he adds.

On the other hand, Thomas adds, "expanding the category of 'sensitive places' simply to all places of public congregation that are not isolated from law enforcement defines the category of 'sensitive places" far too broadly."

[NJRulz 82]

guys not sure about you but i feel this opinion is much broader than we expected or in other words - Christmas in June! lol

In this case, Thomas explains, nothing in the Second Amendment distinguishes between home and public "with respect to the right to keep and bear arms."

it is Thomas' Birthday today as well!!

[DirtyDigz 1,812]

So does this put a "pause" on the Federal and NJ legislation currently in the hopper?

[JohnnyB 4,325]

Happy Birthday Justice Thomas and THANK YOU!

[NJRulz 82]

Sorry for spamming - taking these quotes off the scotus blog for everyone's quick read"

 

Alito responds to dissent... though Heller concerned the possession of a handgun
in the home, the key point that we decided was that “the people,” not just members of the “militia,” have the right to use a firearm to defend themselves. And because many people face a serious risk of lethal violence when they venture outside their homes, the Second Amendment was understood at the time of adoption to apply under those circumstances.

In a concurring opinion joined by the chief, Justice Kavanaugh writes that today's ruling "does not prohibit States from imposing licensing requirements for carrying a handgun for self-defense." "In particular," he says, "the Court's decision does not affect the existing licensing regimes--known as 'shall-issue' regimes-- that are employed in 43 states."

The states, including New York, that had used proper cause requirements "may continue to require licenses for carrying handguns for self-defense so long as those States employ objective licensing requirements like those used by the 43 shall-issue States."

 

Page 2 of Alito's concurrence.  He dismisses Breyer's recounting of mass shootings. "Why, for example, does the dissent
think it is relevant to recount the mass shootings that have
occurred in recent years? ... The New York law at issue in this
case obviously did not stop that [Buffalo] perpetrator."

[MartyZ 692]

So, is everyone submitting their carry permit application today? Can it be done online?

 

[Displaced Texan 11,739]

Woohoo! A well deserved victory for us! 
 

I bet ole Phil is pissed. 

[Mr.Stu 1,918]

3 minutes ago, MartyZ said:

So, is everyone submitting their carry permit application today? Can it be done online?

 

It is a paper form and you need to submit supporting documentation, such as your shooting qualification.

[MartyZ 692]

Thanks Stu, do you have info on qualifications and who offers the training?

[Mr.Stu 1,918]

1 minute ago, MartyZ said:

Thanks Stu, do you have info on qualifications and who offers the training?

I'm working on it. I have a contact that does RPO quals, but he uses a form specific to RPO - I passed BTW. I am working on getting a more generalized form signed by him.

[CMJeepster 2,778]

HELL YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!