Now that we won NYSRPA V Bruen, what comes next ?

ArmedCorgi

ArmedCorgi

.475 A&M Magnum
Messages
14,425
Reaction score
22,648
Location
Utahardia
Phazer said:
So now lawsuits are needed in every state where unconstitutional laws have been enacted? This is going to take awhile.

Of note, the Colorado law used the New York SAFE Act one-evil-feature description of "assault weapons" to be banned.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately it will take lawsuits against established gun control to undo all of it. It would be nice if the Supreme Court could just rule all gun control unconstitutional. With the new and correct standard set on how to rule on 2A cases, it shouldn't take much to walk back gun control though. The annoying thing will be the continued passing of gun control in the face of this ruling. There really ought to be penalties for lawmakers who do.
 
Acer-m14

Acer-m14

.950 JDJ
Messages
34,606
Reaction score
36,443
Location
Livingston
"If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or

If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—

They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
"

www.law.cornell.edu

18 U.S. Code § 241 - Conspiracy against rights

www.law.cornell.edu www.law.cornell.edu
 
L

livingston

20×102mm Vulcan
Messages
43,237
Reaction score
118,795
Location
livingston county

New York Social Media Requirement Prevents Authorization of Permits​

The New York State anti-Second Amendment law, enacted under an extraordinary session brought about by Governor Hochel, is blatantly unconstitutional under the terms of the recent Bruen decision by the Supreme Court. Several provision of the law are likely to be struck down. This essay focuses on the requirement to provide social media accounts, and the practical mechanisms which mean very few permits will be approved under this provision.

Those which are approved are likely to take an unconstitutional amount of time. From Bruen, page 30 of the opinion, footnote 9:



Authorities who are empowered by New York State law to issue permits face extreme danger if they approve of permits under the recently passed scheme. Section IV is a nearly impossible task for one person who is required to process dozens or hundreds of applications. This appears to be by design.

Not many people who have the authority to approve a permit will be able to take the time to meticulously go through three years of social media data to determine if there is one off-color or politically incorrect post among tens of thousands. The process is necessarily subjective and lengthy.

The risk for the approving authority, if they do not do this, will be perceived as very high.

If one of hundreds of permit applicants who are approved, becomes involved in a shooting, even if fully justified, of someone in a government approved "victim" class, their career will be in jeopardy. Consider what happened to the police officers in Minneapolis, who followed written policy, and ended with a prison sentence or undergoing trial.

GUN WATCH

Monitoring people's right to effective self-defence..<br><br> <i>A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed</i><br><br> HOW ODD THAT MASSACRES MOSTLY HAPPEN IN "GUN-FREE ZONES"! When will the...
gunwatch.blogspot.com gunwatch.blogspot.com
 
Phazer

Phazer

.338 Win Mag
Messages
9,173
Reaction score
18,823
Location
Province of Westchester
livingston said:

New York Social Media Requirement Prevents Authorization of Permits​

The New York State anti-Second Amendment law, enacted under an extraordinary session brought about by Governor Hochel, is blatantly unconstitutional under the terms of the recent Bruen decision by the Supreme Court. Several provision of the law are likely to be struck down. This essay focuses on the requirement to provide social media accounts, and the practical mechanisms which mean very few permits will be approved under this provision.

Those which are approved are likely to take an unconstitutional amount of time. From Bruen, page 30 of the opinion, footnote 9:



Authorities who are empowered by New York State law to issue permits face extreme danger if they approve of permits under the recently passed scheme. Section IV is a nearly impossible task for one person who is required to process dozens or hundreds of applications. This appears to be by design.

Not many people who have the authority to approve a permit will be able to take the time to meticulously go through three years of social media data to determine if there is one off-color or politically incorrect post among tens of thousands. The process is necessarily subjective and lengthy.

The risk for the approving authority, if they do not do this, will be perceived as very high.

If one of hundreds of permit applicants who are approved, becomes involved in a shooting, even if fully justified, of someone in a government approved "victim" class, their career will be in jeopardy. Consider what happened to the police officers in Minneapolis, who followed written policy, and ended with a prison sentence or undergoing trial.

GUN WATCH

Monitoring people's right to effective self-defence..<br><br> <i>A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed</i><br><br> HOW ODD THAT MASSACRES MOSTLY HAPPEN IN "GUN-FREE ZONES"! When will the...
gunwatch.blogspot.com gunwatch.blogspot.com
Click to expand...
If I ever have a permit delayed or refused due to a subjective interpretation of something that I have written, electronically or in print, that is legal under my first amendment rights (i.e. not a threat and not a call for violence), I will use all legal means necessary to rectify the situation. I will sue the necessary authorities individually as well as the state agencies responsible for restricting my constitutional rights as a law-abiding, tax-paying, American citizen. I will seek substantial fiscal compensation for abridgement of my civil rights under New York code (since the right to keep and bear arms is not in the New York constitution, but rather in New York civil rights code).

I do not believe in violence. So, I will use the law against those who would bastardize it and use it against me. Should this ever become necessary, you will all hear about it.
 
Onegunnotenough

Onegunnotenough

.40 S&W
Messages
217
Reaction score
141
Location
Middle Village Ny
How come Scotus or lower court doesn't weigh in on the unconstitutional practices of Nys regarding proper cause now good moral character, same thing. It's giving licensing officers same authority.
 
kev74

kev74

20×102mm Vulcan
Messages
45,610
Reaction score
143,915
Location
Orange Co.
Onegunnotenough said:
How come Scotus or lower court doesn't weigh in on the unconstitutional practices of Nys regarding proper cause now good moral character, same thing. It's giving licensing officers same authority.
Click to expand...
The Supremes almost never take a petition directly. Additionally, they can't address an issue until it is brought to them. Anything from them will likely have to work its way up through several rounds of appeals before they weigh in - if they decide to weigh in.
 
Edwardteach72

Edwardteach72

.475 A&M Magnum
U.S. Military
Messages
14,883
Reaction score
15,065
Location
New York
ArmedCorgi said:
So what do you think this means in the face of a looming federal ban?
Click to expand...

I feel that 1808 may pass the house. Even then it's looking hit or miss, but I do not see it passing the senate.. if it does it will be a very very close one, then destroyed in the courts thanks to Bruen.

In the mean time I'm still more interested in the AWB in the 9th and 4th Circuit before this one
 
Acer-m14

Acer-m14

.950 JDJ
Messages
34,606
Reaction score
36,443
Location
Livingston
livingston said:
Authorities who are empowered by New York State law to issue permits face extreme danger if they approve of permits under the recently passed scheme. Section IV is a nearly impossible task for one person who is required to process dozens or hundreds of applications. This appears to be by design.

Not many people who have the authority to approve a permit will be able to take the time to meticulously go through three years of social media data to determine if there is one off-color or politically incorrect post among tens of thousands. The process is necessarily subjective and lengthy.

The risk for the approving authority, if they do not do this, will be perceived as very high.

If one of hundreds of permit applicants who are approved, becomes involved in a shooting, even if fully justified, of someone in a government approved "victim" class, their career will be in jeopardy. Consider what happened to the police officers in Minneapolis, who followed written policy, and ended with a prison sentence or undergoing trial.
Click to expand...

well then just get rid of the permits and then the state will be off the hook ..
 
Onegunnotenough

Onegunnotenough

.40 S&W
Messages
217
Reaction score
141
Location
Middle Village Ny
kev74 said:
The Supremes almost never take a petition directly. Additionally, they can't address an issue until it is brought to them. Anything from them will likely have to work its way up through several rounds of appeals before they weigh in - if they decide to weigh in.
Click to expand...
So basically Nys is not following the ruling and it will wind up in court again.
 
L

livingston

20×102mm Vulcan
Messages
43,237
Reaction score
118,795
Location
livingston county
kev74 said:
The Supremes almost never take a petition directly. Additionally, they can't address an issue until it is brought to them. Anything from them will likely have to work its way up through several rounds of appeals before they weigh in - if they decide to weigh in.
Click to expand...

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit​


The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (in case citations, 2d Cir.) is one of the thirteen United States Courts of Appeals. Its territory comprises the states of Connecticut, New York and Vermont. The court has appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:

First one needs to show they have been wronged ... Show damages rights have been slighted. These laws have to be enacted before we can show we have been slighted. There are cases on the books that have in many cases put on hold until this decision was determined (New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen ) . Which it has . Now many of these cases can and will get shoved back to a lower court for lets say new determination in the way a case is looked at. This is where strict scrutiny comes into play. Hardly any of these courts were using this so a whole lot of cases could be reviewed. and acted upon.

I believe it is a big mess for the court system . It is a mess or their own doing.
Folks I am not a legal scholar :wave: Feel free to correct my mistakes in the above answer.
 
Celt

Celt

.338 Win Mag
Messages
9,151
Reaction score
18,409
Location
Westchester
Edwardteach72 said:
I feel that 1808 may pass the house. Even then it's looking hit or miss, but I do not see it passing the senate.. if it does it will be a very very close one, then destroyed in the courts thanks to Bruen.

In the mean time I'm still more interested in the AWB in the 9th and 4th Circuit before this one
Click to expand...
This is the lefts attempt to bankrupt gun rights orgs, and stall citizens ability to freely exercise their 2a rights.
 
G

Gunright

.45 acp
Messages
455
Reaction score
548
Location
Upstate NY
kev74 said:
The Supremes almost never take a petition directly. Additionally, they can't address an issue until it is brought to them. Anything from them will likely have to work its way up through several rounds of appeals before they weigh in - if they decide to weigh in.
Click to expand...
There are three ways a case can make it to the supreme court:
1. (The usual say) - a case from a lower federal (inferior) court is appealed. That is, decided in a district court, appealed to the appellete court, and appealed to Scotus via writ of centori (latin for "to be more fully informed"). SCOTUS has the option to take or not take the case.
2. Appeal from a state supreme court. That is, a case is done in a states court system (not federal), and an appeal is made after that state's highest court decides the case. SCOTUS may take the case if they deem the case interesting in terms of violation of constitutional or federal law.
3. Original jurisdiction - while unusual, this can happen if the case is a conflict between states where there is no other court having jurisdiction.

It would be interesting if one of the free states sued NY resulting in a possible SCOTUS review (#3) on grounds around perhaps the 14th amendment and treatment of its citizens while traveling in NY. Long shot, and IANAL so perhaps issues like standing would prevent the case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top