New Class Action Lawsuit Challenges the Constitutionality of Red Flag Laws

[Madmallard]

A class action lawsuit was filed in a New Jersey court last month to challenge the constitutionality of red flag laws that take away firearms from an individual deemed a threat without due process following an arbitrary judicial decree.

Albert J. Rescinio is a New Jersey attorney representing David Greco, a man whose firearm was seized under the Extreme Risk Protection Order Act of 2018 after the law went into effect in September. He is arguing that red flag laws abrogate the constitutional rights of citizens who have not committed any crime.

“Why can’t you give people the opportunity to know what is going on? To give them the opportunity to be heard?” Rescinio said. “You are being deprived of your constitutional rights without a hearing, without being given the opportunity to know what is going on.”

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED: New Class Action Lawsuit Challenges the Constitutionality of Red Flag Laws - Big League Politics

The people are fighting back against anti-constitutional tyranny.

bigleaguepolitics.com

 

[Grimscale]

In New Jersey.

good luck with that.

 

[S&W Fan]

In New Jersey.

good luck with that.

It’s gotta start somewhere.

 

[prambo]

Going to jump right to the heart of this...

IMHO....

Ah.....NO!.....SCROTUM will not take this case, regardless of the fact that it is really not a 2A case, but does violate the 4th, 5th, 6th Amendments, and probably others as well.

They (except Thomas) are hacks-in-black...afraid of their masters.

And yes, it has occurred to me that calling them SCROTUM is a misnomer, since they have no balls.

 

[Jmac00]

In New Jersey.

good luck with that.

that was my immediate thought, if this was brought in a Free State, like Texas or Louisiana, it might have a chance. But in Nazi Jersey, this law suite has zero chance of success

 

[oc shooter]

interesting hope they win

 

[carpediem]

They won't win, but an idiot can see these laws run afoul of the Constitution. I find it ironic how commucrats want to "restore constitutional rights" to felons while creating faux felons strictly to strip away constitutional rights in the absence of any reason to do so.

 

[Tisto]

This will be thrown out of court for lack of STANDING. The N.J. Supreme Court will get rid of it so that it CANNOT BE DECIDED UPON THE MERIT OF THE CASE. The LAST thing they want is to have this law adjudicated as unconstitutional.

 

[kev74]

The 3rd circuit, which covers NJ has an 8-6 advantage of conservative appointments vs. liberal appointments. Could be interesting.

 

[@thewheels]

Going to jump right to the heart of this...

IMHO....

Ah.....NO!.....SCROTUM will not take this case, regardless of the fact that it is really not a 2A case, but does violate the 4th, 5th, 6th Amendments, and probably others as well.

They (except Thomas) are hacks-in-black...afraid of their masters.

And yes, it has occurred to me that calling them SCROTUM is a misnomer, since they have no balls.

Even if they took the case, they'd botch the decision.

 

[spat]

The 3rd circuit, which covers NJ has an 8-6 advantage of conservative appointments vs. liberal appointments. Could be interesting.

Conservative vs liberal doesn't matter, they're all statists.

They disagree about what the state should do, but they all believe it has whatever power it wants.

 

[GOPerfect]

I think it is funny and very short sighted of so many people. Yeah, Red flag laws may or may not violate the Second Amendment; I can tell you this for sure, Red Flag laws absolutely violate at least four other Rights that next to no one even thinks about.

Go ahead, keep your blinders on and only look out for violations of one amendment.

 

[Saltwater60]

I for one can’t see how they can take a right away without being criminally charged. This could have far and wide consequences and sure as hell could get interesting. There is a lot to consider as GOPerfect stated.

 

[prambo]

I for one can’t see how they can take a right away without being criminally charged. This could have far and wide consequences and sure as hell could get interesting. There is a lot to consider as GOPerfect stated.

"They" don't consider them rights - but "privileges", bestowed by the righteous and ordained "elites" that rule we Deplorable scum and, thus, can be taken a way on a whim.

The hard nugget of truth is that, even though ~50% +/- of the country doesn't agree with this Maoist horseshit, and voted in a President to turn things around, the communist apparatchiks in the bureaucracy and their fellow travelers make the rules. We're just the serfs who get to pay for it all.

 

[Apeman]

They want to save lives? They don't care about anybodies rights. I say every time someone leaves a bar they get pulled over for DWI. Every time someone is seen leaving the grocery store or liquor store with alcohol then arrest them for DWI. You never know - they might drink on the way home. Give every person that rides a sport bike a ticket for doing wheelies. Let's just go full retard and punish everybody because they might do something illegal. Then maybe the courts will finally make the right decisions about our rights as US citizens.

 

[Podmonkey]