Jump to content
Bklynracer

Supreme Court Takes First 2A Case in a Decade

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, NickySantoro said:

You are really naive, aren't you.

Naive no, I know that there is no historical precedence of any state OPENLY DEFYING THE HIGH COURT! I already gave you a good example. Tennessee, Texas, Alabama etc....(50) now issue marriage licenses to gay couples per a SCOTUS ruling in 2016-2017 I believe. NJ would be no different with regards to CCW permits. 

 

21 hours ago, voyager9 said:

So honest question, what happens if they don’t?   What “forces” anyone to comply with scotus?

Civil rights lawsuits in which NJ would get clobbered in court. I know if no time in US history in which SCOTUS rules and a state just entirely ignores the ruling!

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Bklynracer said:

This case was mentioned of Fox The Five. It was said that a ruling could come as early as tomorrow. 

Anybody hear anything from other sources.

Hoping for a good ruling.

There was a rumor that we were going to get a ruling last Friday. Now all the cases from November except the one we're waiting for have been ruled on. Another rumor is that Judge Thomas is writing the decision.  All bets are on the end of June for the ruling.  The history has been that controversial rulings always come right before the summer break. That would be late June. I hope it does come earlier   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Bklynracer said:

This case was mentioned of Fox The Five. It was said that a ruling could come as early as tomorrow. 

Anybody hear anything from other sources.

Hoping for a good ruling.

Wowzers. That'd be great!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Bklynracer said:

This case was mentioned of Fox The Five. It was said that a ruling could come as early as tomorrow. 

Anybody hear anything from other sources.

Hoping for a good ruling.

I have not heard any rumors of an early verdict, but I will say a prayer tonight!

20 minutes ago, EX Carnival man said:

There was a rumor that we were going to get a ruling last Friday. Now all the cases from November except the one we're waiting for have been ruled on. Another rumor is that Judge Thomas is writing the decision.  All bets are on the end of June for the ruling.  The history has been that controversial rulings always come right before the summer break. That would be late June. I hope it does come earlier   

I sure hope Clarence Thomas will be writing the majority opinion, that would be a pleasure!

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bklynracer said:

This case was mentioned of Fox The Five. It was said that a ruling could come as early as tomorrow. 

Anybody hear anything from other sources.

Hoping for a good ruling.

By definition right?   The ruling isn’t out yet and didn’t come out today so it HAS to come out no earlier than tomorrow.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The less scrupulous Gun-content producers on youtube will milk every possible decision opening to generate views until the decision is released.

"SCOTUS might S-M-A-S-H may issue THIS FRIDAY!!!! [SCREAMING_BIDEN_FACE.JPG]"

Most law analysts who don't have a financial interest in generating clicks think it will be end of June.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DirtyDigz said:

The less scrupulous Gun-content producers on youtube will milk every possible decision opening to generate views until the decision is released.

"SCOTUS might S-M-A-S-H may issue THIS FRIDAY!!!! [SCREAMING_BIDEN_FACE.JPG]"

Most law analysts who don't have a financial interest in generating clicks think it will be end of June.

I heard end of June as well.

 

Still not optimistic about any changes in NJ, but interested in reading the opinions from justices on both sides...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It can be no later than end of June. It will be the end of June because gun cases are always at the end of June. This is because they are contentious. It’s the scotus version of a Friday afternoon press release. They drop it on the last day at the last minute and go on vacation so they don’t have to listen to anyone until shit settles down. 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bklynracer said:

What determines who writes the decision?

If Thomas is writing it, would it lean more in our favor?

1. The majority ie if we go 6-3 or 5-4 on the case.

2. YES, Justice Thomas has wrote very pro-2A things in the past in his dissents when his fellow judges refused to hear gun cases. In his last dissent he wrote something to the following effect "As we walk the marbled halls of justice with our private armed guards, the average person that works late nights has no sort of protection etc..." you get the idea, I want him to write the majority opinion.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Bklynracer said:

What determines who writes the decision?

If Thomas is writing it, would it lean more in our favor?

from

Quote

the Chief Justice, or the most senior Justice in the majority if the Chief Justice is in the dissent, assigns a Justice in the majority to write the opinion of the Court. 

It was mentioned elsewhere that typically justices are assigned one opinion per term and Thomas and Barret were the only two (of the expected majority) that hadn’t authored an opinion.  It was speculated that they wouldn’t assign Barret to such a controversial case.  
 

Thought this was interesting too

Quote

A majority of Justices must agree to all of the contents of the Court's opinion before it is publicly delivered. Justices do this by "signing onto" the opinion. The Justice in charge of writing the opinion must be careful to take into consideration the comments and concerns of the others who voted in the majority. If this does not happen, there may not be enough Justices to maintain the majority. On rare occasions in close cases, a dissenting opinion later becomes the majority opinion because one or more Justices switch their votes after reading the drafts of the majority and dissenting opinions. 

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Bklynracer said:

What determines who writes the decision?

If Thomas is writing it, would it lean more in our favor?

The rumor mill is either Thomas or Barrett Again just going on what I've been reading with his seniority  he could take it. Also the betting people are saying neither Thomas or Barrett haven't written any recent decisions . The Las Vegas money is on either one of those two leaning towards Thomas with his seniority. Myself. I don't trust Barrett.

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be better if we concentrated our efforts on the "what if" .

Is the NJ 2A community prepared for a victory,   have any of the NJ 2A organizations prepared a strategy to fight the inevitable fight ahead should the ruling be in our favor.

are any of the groups that do the Florida / Utah permit classes prepared to do a NJ one?      

Where is the ANJRPC,  I have not read anything from them  on this matter.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, GlennS87 said:

Assuming victory, the law in NJ will have to be changed to allow for shall issue as opposed to the current may issue. It will likely take a lawsuit to force that it to happen.

It'll probably take a number of lawsuits.  Even if one lawsuit forces the change, it will take follow-ups when NJ continues to not make the change, then challenges when the change NJ implements is much more narrow and onerous than SCOTUS had in mind, then when NJ does finally change their law, it will require a bunch of follow-up lawsuits because NJ will ignore the change they made.

And NJ will be filing appeals every step of the way.

I really wish this state hadn't made me so cynical about things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, 10X said:

It'll probably take a number of lawsuits.  Even if one lawsuit forces the change, it will take follow-ups when NJ continues to not make the change, then challenges when the change NJ implements is much more narrow and onerous than SCOTUS had in mind, then when NJ does finally change their law, it will require a bunch of follow-up lawsuits because NJ will ignore the change they made.

And NJ will be filing appeals every step of the way.

I really wish this state hadn't made me so cynical about things.

I would predict that lawsuits won't happen. NJ will drag its feet, but they won't risk multimillion dollar civil suits to charge someone that will 100% win on appeal. 

They are better off passing a law and getting people licensed than risk unlicensed people carrying they cant prosecute. 

In places like NY, you don't even go to jail anymore for carrying a firearm illegally until you're successfully found guilty. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JackDaWhack wrote: "I would predict that lawsuits won't happen. NJ will drag its feet, but they won't risk multimillion dollar civil suits to charge someone that will 100% win on appeal."

You're seriously predicting that NJ will react from motivations of fiscal prudence? ROFLMAO!

I do think that one of your implications is correct, however. Assuming the eventual SCOTUS ruling is favorable (highly probable) and broad enough to impact NJ law in our favor (I won't give you much better than 60/40 odds for that), I think that at least one person is going to need to get him or herself arrested for carrying in compliance with the SCOTUS ruling, but in violation of NJ law, then spend a ton of money on appeals in hopes of overturning the conviction. That must be done with OPM (firearms rights organizations) since that person is taking the risk of incarceration. No, I'm not volunteering, I'll leave first. That actually is my current plan, with the lack of 2A acknowledgement one of the main reasons. Should a favorable ruling actually result in reasonable carry rights being recognized in NJ, and a few other things change that are highly unlikely to do so, I might stay. I love the area (been here pretty much my entire septuagenarian life) , but I despise all of the politicians and an increasing majority of the residents. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is already an NJ case on hold at the NJ Supreme court (I think) that is waiting for the NY decision as it would likely create a rule, or at least inform on how to decide the NJ case.

It does not seem likely the NJ executive would go against the NJ Supreme court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mr.Stu said:

There is already an NJ case on hold at the NJ Supreme court (I think) that is waiting for the NY decision as it would likely create a rule, or at least inform on how to decide the NJ case.

It does not seem likely the NJ executive would go against the NJ Supreme court.

The NJ executive is currently pushing the safe storage bills, which would contradict Heller in parts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When asked about the SCOTUS Bruen case during the 03/31/22 episode of WNYC's "Ask Governor Murphy":

https://www.wnyc.org/story/ask-governor-murphy-how-will-new-budget-tackle-property-taxes-and-affordable-housing

(segment starts at 28:30)

[Staffer] "..are you paying attention to this case, and if the conceal carry ban is overturned, is NJ preparing for this?"

[Murphy] "...If this is overturned, we will clearly do everything in our power, if this is overturned, at the state level to try to compensate if we get bad news..."

[Host] "..If they decide in favor of open carry for NY state, does that automatically make every law across the country unconstitutional...does NJ have to immediately go to open carry?".

[Murphy] "...I don't have a good legal constitutional answer for you but...not on my watch..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, DirtyDigz said:

When asked about the SCOTUS Bruen case during the 03/31/22 episode of WNYC's "Ask Governor Murphy":

https://www.wnyc.org/story/ask-governor-murphy-how-will-new-budget-tackle-property-taxes-and-affordable-housing

(segment starts at 28:30)

[Staffer] "..are you paying attention to this case, and if the conceal carry ban is overturned, is NJ preparing for this?"

[Murphy] "...If this is overturned, we will clearly do everything in our power, if this is overturned, at the state level to try to compensate if we get bad news..."

[Host] "..If they decide in favor of open carry for NY state, does that automatically make every law across the country unconstitutional...does NJ have to immediately go to open carry?".

[Murphy] "...I don't have a good legal constitutional answer for you but...not on my watch..."

Murphy is a politician not a judge.  He's not going to have a choice. The law will be the law. Judges and lawyers respect Supreme Court rulings even if they don't agree with them. I really don't think NJ will ignore a Supreme court ruling. If they were to do that it would undermine our court system in this country. If politicians and judges can ignore the Supreme court than we have a dictatorship.  

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, samiam said:

JackDaWhack wrote: "I would predict that lawsuits won't happen. NJ will drag its feet, but they won't risk multimillion dollar civil suits to charge someone that will 100% win on appeal."

You're seriously predicting that NJ will react from motivations of fiscal prudence? ROFLMAO!

I do think that one of your implications is correct, however. Assuming the eventual SCOTUS ruling is favorable (highly probable) and broad enough to impact NJ law in our favor (I won't give you much better than 60/40 odds for that), I think that at least one person is going to need to get him or herself arrested for carrying in compliance with the SCOTUS ruling, but in violation of NJ law, then spend a ton of money on appeals in hopes of overturning the conviction. That must be done with OPM (firearms rights organizations) since that person is taking the risk of incarceration. No, I'm not volunteering, I'll leave first. That actually is my current plan, with the lack of 2A acknowledgement one of the main reasons. Should a favorable ruling actually result in reasonable carry rights being recognized in NJ, and a few other things change that are highly unlikely to do so, I might stay. I love the area (been here pretty much my entire septuagenarian life) , but I despise all of the politicians and an increasing majority of the residents. 

The ATF won't even drag home built lowers into a court room, bumpstocks etc. They pass laws to scare people like you, are willing to arrest someone and then tuck tail when they realized the case won't make it past indictment, or runs the precedence to actually trigger a civil case and the outright elimination of the law together. 

Better to leave a useless law on the books to scare people than give someone the power to wipe it out. 

 

You won't be hard pressed to find a lawyer willing to take a portion of your winnings that would reach tens of millions. NJ bail reform will have you out of police custody within 2 days... 

Now i.dont even think it gets that far, most judges even in NJ wouldn't let a prosecutor up hold a law that's been struck down by SCOTUS, literally shit that will get you thrown off the bench and even possibly disbarred. Ultimately this will depend on the verbiage of the ruling and how clear cut the opinion is... 

Politicians can play this stupid game, but the judicial system doesn't typically as a whole. Not to mention, if a judge violates your civil rights, they CAN be charged with a federal crime if SCOTUS finds their behavior intentional and strips them of judicial immunity.... judges like their immunity and I doubt theyre gonna play with that type of fire. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/29/2022 at 5:00 PM, EX Carnival man said:

Murphy is a politician not a judge.  He's not going to have a choice. The law will be the law. Judges and lawyers respect Supreme Court rulings even if they don't agree with them. I really don't think NJ will ignore a Supreme court ruling. If they were to do that it would undermine our court system in this country. If politicians and judges can ignore the Supreme court than we have a dictatorship.  

THIS^^^^    and also remember Murphy cannot pass new laws unilaterally (we all know where we'd be right now if he could). The NJ legislature hasn't seemed like they are in the mood to pass new gun restriction laws lately. Now, I certainly don't trust the Dems in Trenton one bit. But, what happened to Sweeney is probably still fresh in their minds, as well as the fact that Murphy has been good a pissing off the legislature by trying to dictate to them what to do (rather than work out deals) - hopefully they will have more sense than Murphy does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Oakridgefirearms said:

hopefully they will have more sense than Murphy does.

You my friend are an optimist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NJ statute doesn’t even have to change when a favorable SCOTUS decision is handed down in June. The linch pin has always been the “letter of need”. So leaving the law alone, the issuing body (superior court judge) simply accepts your letter of need attached to the application. We describe our need as self defense and all lawful purposes per the SCOTUS opinion. Strangely, the bass-ackward way this state issues carry permits works in our favor. We won’t have to wait 6 months for the legislature to craft a new law. Judges understand higher court’s and with the favorable ruling they simply allow the court’s wording in the letter of need. They won’t need the AG’s permission or the governor’s order or some new law to act. I really think they can “shall issue” this thing with the law as is following the SCOTUS directive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...