Jump to content
diamondd817

While Everyone is Distracted With NJ CCW This Just Happened

Recommended Posts

"Four Second Amendment cases that the Supreme Court held pending the Bruen decision have been distributed for conference. We should know what the court plans to do with these cases by the end of the week."

 

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/gunpolicy/status/154218032461615923

 

Yes, that's the NJ Mag Limit case.

 

Screenshot_20220629-152329.png

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, father-of-three said:

I will ask objectively...

How many passed?

 

none yet, the twiiter post said:

Quote
Four Second Amendment cases that the Supreme Court held pending the Bruen decision have been distributed for conference. We should know what the court plans to do with these cases by the end of the week.

if anyone listened to GFH radio over the weekend they spoke about this being  possible

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting.

It would be great if they decided that standard capacity magazines were legal

I bet there are a few people who would suddenly find some that had gone missing a few years ago.

I bet there will also be a fair number of people who (oooops!) realize they had never switched over to 10 round magazines!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FXDX said:

 

none yet, the twiiter post said:

if anyone listened to GFH radio over the weekend they spoke about this being  possible

 

 

I was referring to the bills in the legislature.  I'm pretty sure I won't be allowed to register my body armor because my job is  not one of the ones specifed for registration, so I assume I will need to take a trip to Pennsylvania to avoid beng a felon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, father-of-three said:

I was referring to the bills in the legislature.  I'm pretty sure I won't be allowed to register my body armor because my job is  not one of the ones specifed for registration, so I assume I will need to take a trip to Pennsylvania to avoid beng a felon.

That and the age increase bill didn't advance:  New batch of gun laws passed, heads to Murphy – but some missing (nj1015.com)

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what are we looking at here, these are headed to conference.. will an opinion be rendered? Or are they being remanded back to the lower courts?

With the session poised to close, I don't expect an opinion being published, and I don't see the lower courts shifting their ruling based on Bruen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No other specific info but all of the remaining 2A issues (including the magazine limit) have been remanded back to lower courts for reconsideration under Bruen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, diamondd817 said:

That's what we were looking for!

Good news all around, maybe SCOTUS spared the libs feelings temporarily in light of their current asswhooping. The lower courts were wrong the first time around without Bruen and I think this is the courts way of saying get your shit together before we do it for you. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This I love:

"The state protests that magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds are not “necessary or appropriate for self-defense” because it is rarely necessary to fire more than ten rounds to ward off an attack. BIO.15. That claim is in serious tension with the fact that the standard-issue weapon for the state’s own law-enforcement officers is the Glock 19 pistol with a 15-round magazine. See Pet.App.131. But more to the point, the test this Court articulated in Heller, drawing on centuries of common-law tradition, asks whether arms are commonly possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, not whether law-abiding citizens commonly need to use them for self-defense. See Heller, 554 U.S. at 625. And the American people have “overwhelmingly chosen” magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds. Id. at 628."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not having read Justice Thomas' ruling which I understand is lengthy, I will assume that it is quite clear and direct and would be somewhat difficult for the third circuit to misinterpret, assuming there are no attempts at blatantly legislating from the bench.

I like at least a little optimism.

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...