Jump to content
John Boy

Supreme Court Reschedules Concealed Carry Case. Again...

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Zeke said:

Going on 8

With a new Justice....

I know. At great odds at this point. On the flip side, there is a chance the liberal Judges might want to hear it before they die off and get replaced by Trump. But who knows, it could go 5-4 either way.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, diamondd817 said:

I know. At great odds at this point. On the flip side, there is a chance the liberal Judges might want to hear it before they die off and get replaced by Trump. But who knows, it could go 5-4 either way.

Nope, it's happening 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it could be telling if there were statistics with regards to the number of times a case has been rescheduled after a judicial vacancy for over a year.  what is the protocol for getting a new justice spooled up? what cases is he allowed to weigh in on?  there was just a ruling this week that was 8-0... Gorsuch didn't give an opinion, so is there a delay with regards to what cases he can hear?  finally, are there any other cases that have been rescheduled a number of times recently, specifically since Gorsuch was sworn in?

Share this post


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

Can someone PM me when we can this is finished and I can apply with no reservations? 

Thanks

If they take the case, and if they rule that carrying is covered, then NJ will pass a law requiring an expensive burdensome training course that is only given during the week. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ChrisJM981 said:

If they take the case, and if they rule that carrying is covered, then NJ will pass a law requiring an expensive burdensome training course that is only given during the week. 

I'm not saying that wouldn't happen, but how long could it withstand a legal challenge?  Isn't one of the arguments behind not requiring ID to vote that it disproportionately burdens the poor because of the fees involved in obtaining state ID? The left can't shouldn't argue that $40 violates the 15th, 19th and 26th, but that {insert ridiculous cost of CC training course here} is no impediment to the 2nd.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One step at a time.  Even if Peruta is heard by the Court and we win, I have no doubt that NJ will push the envelope to make it as difficult as possible to obtain a permit and may not even comply at all without another lawsuit.  Best case, even with a win, this will take years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, PDM said:

One step at a time.  Even if Peruta is heard by the Court and we win, I have no doubt that NJ will push the envelope to make it as difficult as possible to obtain a permit and may not even comply at all without another lawsuit.  Best case, even with a win, this will take years.

This is exactly what I was thinking.  NJ will throw up road block after road block, tie it up in court for years and then come up with more road blocks and on and on.  Look at Chicago that's been their play book so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2017 at 8:29 AM, ChrisJM981 said:

If they take the case, and if they rule that carrying is covered, then NJ will pass a law requiring an expensive burdensome training course that is only given during the week. 

 

On 5/23/2017 at 9:37 AM, Cereza said:

I'm not saying that wouldn't happen, but how long could it withstand a legal challenge?  Isn't one of the arguments behind not requiring ID to vote that it disproportionately burdens the poor because of the fees involved in obtaining state ID? The left can't shouldn't argue that $40 violates the 15th, 19th and 26th, but that {insert ridiculous cost of CC training course here} is no impediment to the 2nd.  

Having a proficiency requirement wouldn't be odd at all as many states who issue require it.  However, to your point. NJ's will be more than NRA basic pistol, armed service or a hunting license.   Thus, if they do something whacky it may be hard to challenge as long as they are issuing permits.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rob0115 said:

 

Having a proficiency requirement wouldn't be odd at all as many states who issue require it.  However, to your point. NJ's will be more than NRA basic pistol, armed service or a hunting license.   Thus, if they do something whacky it may be hard to challenge as long as they are issuing permits.  

I can't see it being more stringent than what is in existence. The LE union lobby, and any change would have be across the board.

Share this post


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

I can't see it being more stringent than what is in existence. The LE union lobby, and any change would have be across the board.

I think LEO would be expempt based on their continuous qualifications during their career.   I'm not defending the merits of that stance   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Rob0115 said:

I think LEO would be expempt based on their continuous qualifications during their career.   I'm not defending the merits of that stance   

I could see that.

But judges, politicians and the connected?

Share this post


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

I could see that.

But judges, politicians and the connected?

Well the connected get whatever.  They're getting carry permits now.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Zeke said:

But they still have to meet same qualifications as retired LE , security, etc

I don't think they'll be put off if the cost is expensive to meet the requirement that the every man has to meet. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rob0115 said:

I don't think they'll be put off if the cost is expensive to meet the requirement that the every man has to meet. 

I agree. It will be " hardship " or " burden " case. With non active or retired LE security being the exception.

How big is the armed guard lobby?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Zeke said:

I agree. It will be " hardship " or " burden " case. With non active or retired LE security being the exception.

How big is the armed guard lobby?

Yeah I don't know.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aaaaaaaand .... once again, not action on Peruta at last conference,  Results of last conference announced this morning and no mention of Peruta.  Or Masterpiece Cakeshop by the way, another interesting case and one that anyone who cares about the 1st amendment should care very deeply about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if the court takes this case and rules in favor of the Constitution, the court has no means to enforce their ruling.  They are impotent.  NJ will ignore it wholesale, even if there is a case against NJ directly stemming from a positive decision on Peruta, NJ will ignore that at all.  They have no reason not to.  What's SCOTUS going to do?  Send in the NG?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even if the court takes this case and rules in favor of the Constitution, the court has no means to enforce their ruling.  They are impotent.  NJ will ignore it wholesale, even if there is a case against NJ directly stemming from a positive decision on Peruta, NJ will ignore that at all.  They have no reason not to.  What's SCOTUS going to do?  Send in the NG?



Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with what happened in Illinois just a few years ago.
  • Like 1

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...