She may surprise us. Even though she is a liberal, these SCOTUS people tend to take this stuff very seriously. A lower court ignoring a decision from SCOTUS?! They treat the court as a very prestigious and respected institution. Just because she wasn't in the majority opinion doesn't mean she wants the court that she sits on to be ignored or have the appearance that they don't have power. Even the conservative and liberal justices all get along very well and spend time together. You will never hear one justice say a bad thing about another. They want and demand that the court is respected.
Temporary Restaining Order Issued For Concealed Carry Improvement Act (merged thread)
- Thread starter Glock_USA
- Start date
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
Manchin said he wouldn’t support many things And he’s waffled. Sinema did the same. Maybe they learned because Manchin got fucked hard, but democrats don’t seem to learn much very often.
Yes they need to pass a bill but I’m not so sure it won’t or can’t be done. The Republican majority in the house is very slim and more than a few care more to hold their seat than do what’s right. The senate can be easily done and if the Republicans squash everything it will give the crying dems enough to say we need to get rid of the philibuster to get anything accomplished and it will happen. I put nothing past anyone at this point and yes they will jam through any nominations and holy shit will they be far, far left.
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
I agree with that but I can sure tell you they are already setting the stage to do it through other means. Ginny Thomas working with the January 6th protest and they are saying Altilo is leaking information and that violates court rules. It’s already moving in that direction.
I hope that regardless of the outcome, that we DO NOT STOP short of taking this whole shitshow up to SCOTUS. To that end I will continue to contribute money to our side to keep up the fight.
If we stop short of that, - even with a partial win IF NYS does not appeal, then we will end up with a mess on our hands that will leave CCW holders and other NYS gun owners trying to navigate a minefield of crap regulations and becoming prohibited felons if we even misstep slightly.
No, we absolutely need to get this crap thrown out at SCOTUS, - hopefully with a much more detailed ruling with specifics and teeth to enforce it.
I read the Emergency Application (EA) in its' entirety. It is extremely well written, on point, and persuasive. Of course, I am no lawyer!
This whole thing reminds me of the scene in My Cousin Vinny, when he presented his lucid and well thought out argument, and was promptly overruled...
Also, it was good to read an explanation as to why NYS used that obscure BS decision "In re World Trade Ctr. Disaster Site Litig.," as their justification. This EA explained why it does not apply here. Sounds good to me, and I certainly hope they are correct. I believe they are. It is explained on Pages 12 & 13 of the EA.
My prediction is that the "wise Latina", (who will hopefully leave during the next Republican presidential administration and Senate Republican majority due to diabetes, - or ANY OTHER medical condition for that matter) will deny this application, and try to keep it from the entire SCOTUS, -even though it is led by that traitorous scumbag Roberts (who sold our asses out in various decisions, - including his Obamacare ruling). I am still wondering if HE is the John Roberts listed in the flight logs as having flown on Epstein's Lolita Express to Epstein's pedophile island.
I also would not be at all surprised if the Judges on the 2nd Circuit, as well as Justice Sotomayor have been contacted privately by either Hochul or others in NYS politics and told what to do, - or else. Attached below is a copy of the Emergency Application for you to read.
And if you want to get pissed off, attached is a link to C*nty McWho*ekul's news conference back in June where she attacked the Bruen decision and all NYS CCW holders. They actually included the link to this very damming video in the Emergency Application! NY Gov. Hochul defiant after Supreme Court gun decision: 'We're just getting started'
Last edited:
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
Not so sure about this. I guess we will know fairly soon. Ought to be interesting. Remember the right crosses over and sides with the left many times, but I can’t remember a time when that’s happened the other way around recently. I think it has always been a split on 2a cases with the left dissenting. I’m not so sure I see her wanting to help us. Remember there’s a way out and she could give the lower court some direction on how to settle it. I think they will grant us carry at churches since the Supreme Court case for denying services is going that way now. I think we will possibly get a few other places back but I’m not sure how it will work out precisely.
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
I agree with this and that’s what we need. I’d love to see them get slapped down hard and say the government can’t tell you where you can and can’t go with a gun except these 5-6 places but if that’s the case there has to be a remote mechanism or a way to lock up your firearm on site if you’re denied access with a firearm.
Also certain things like campers, motor homes, semi truck cabs are Ho es and you’re allowed to have a gun in your home no matter where that home is so yes national reciprocity is needed. Time will tell but I’m not super hopeful.
This isn't the same thing as hearing a case. I dont think so anyway. The case was decided and instructions were given / framework was set, and it is now being ignored. It' not like they're starting from scratch on a new case. They are saying here's what your court has decided and this is how the lower court is undermining you. The merits have already been decided. They aren't going to re-open Bruen. It is what it is.
Same!
He ruled in our favor on this one and even challenged the states lawyers asking along the lines of "are people more likely to be attacked and need a firearm in the woods in the middle of nowhere or on the subway?" He wasn't buying the states nonsense.
It also take the House to pass a bill to expand the Court..
Democrats Unveil Long-Shot Plan To Expand Size Of Supreme Court From 9 To 13
Republicans were scathing in their response to the measure, but the bill has a grim future even without their opposition. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she has no plans to bring it to the floor.
www.npr.org
Liberal congressional Democrats unveiled a proposal Thursday to expand the number of seats on the U.S. Supreme Court from nine to 13 — a move Republicans have blasted as "court packing" and which has almost no chance of being voted on after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she has "no plans to bring it to the floor."
So you are correct about the next 2 years!
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
For sure. But it doesn’t have to work in our favor either. The second circuit will help us very minimally IMO and the SC doesn’t have to take it up after that. They denied how many 2A cases previous to this?? I guess I’m just not very hopeful.
Sotomayor can send it back to the second circuit with some guidance as I suspect she will. I suspect she will say there is a religious exemption of some sort and we will get churches and maybe a few other government run areas. I don’t expect to get all private property back as we should, but maybe we will.
I just have a bad feeling about it with anything in the meantime. I’m 50/50 on the full Supreme Court helping us out.
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
She’s not going to be speaker of the house anymore right? I’m not sure this matters much anymore. I also feel like there are enough republicans in the house that would or could switch sides to vote yes on this to hold their seats. Call me crazy but I don’t trust any of them.It also take the House to pass a bill to expand the Court..
Democrats Unveil Long-Shot Plan To Expand Size Of Supreme Court From 9 To 13
Republicans were scathing in their response to the measure, but the bill has a grim future even without their opposition. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she has no plans to bring it to the floor.
Liberal congressional Democrats unveiled a proposal Thursday to expand the number of seats on the U.S. Supreme Court from nine to 13 — a move Republicans have blasted as "court packing" and which has almost no chance of being voted on after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she has "no plans to bring it to the floor."
So you are correct about the next 2 years!
If she denies, we can appeal to Thomas. Its not granting cert like in a regular case. They are asking them to look at their already settled case being stayed by lower courts. Its an emergency action.
Dont believe so. She can agree to have SCOTUS take it or not. If not then see above.
That is in direct violation of what her court has already ruled. She doesn't have the ability to unilaterally throw out what SCOTUS has established and create her own rules. She can't override Bruen. Its already settled.
Why would they rule differently than they did a few months ago? Wouldn't make any sense. They were good with their written opinions in June or whenever it was and now they all feel differently? They got it wrong before? I dont think so.
Yes I am well aware the the Republicans are taking over the House!
I hope to Hell that you are correct.
maverick52
.223 Rem
I am usually pessimistic but I am hopeful on this one. Like @Glock_USA said there is a decorum and sanctity of the court they like to uphold. It’s pretty obvious that NY is acting in defiance of the court. Hochul said so herself. Now many other states are following in her steps.
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
Republicans have control of the house in January too. They need both houses to increase the number of justices. But just the senate for confirmation .
I have as much faith in the court system as I have for the political class that create the laws or the police that violate their oaths in regards to the gun issue.
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
You trust the slim majority to hold?
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
i really hate that saying ..
your still saying permit me master to carry
National Constitutional Carry .. if we can keep the damn Constitution
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
JunkBoxFull
6.5 Creedmoor
Rights delayed = Rights denied
They will never stop coming for us all. They will use YOUR tax dollars to fight every lawsuit to beat you.
It has become the slow death of the gun culture. Stall tactic`s. Once they bankrupt you, you won`t have anywhere to turn, or go.
They will never stop coming for us all. They will use YOUR tax dollars to fight every lawsuit to beat you.
It has become the slow death of the gun culture. Stall tactic`s. Once they bankrupt you, you won`t have anywhere to turn, or go.
Phazer
.450/400 Nitro Ex
BINGO!
The Left understands that the process is the punishment.
So, even if you win....you lose.
Deplorable Me
.700 Nitro Express
How do you think 1776 was funded? You think that was cheap? Too many passive gun owners with wallets tighter than their asses.
So it seems that if Justice Sotomayor were to turn down GOA's emergency request to the SCOTUS it can then be filed with another Justice (Thomas) for review.
ManualF150
.308 Win
From what I gathered; this dog and pony show isn't going to do anything for the rights of gun owners.
The Bruen decision allowed for tighter gun control by leveraging the Supreme Court to bring forth the discussion, which then more judges will be allowed to review because of what some states like NY is doing. Which in turn will then change what occurred from the original Bruen 6-3 decision.
Think back before Bruen, there was no immediate discussion/changes, so it was status quo and the states had their laws.
Mark my words, none of this is good for the US in general; don't care where you live -- NY or not.
I've found through life experiences, sometimes you need to choose wisely what you want to make a big deal about. I've learned that sometimes you need to clam up and just deal with it even if you don't agree with it. This is one of them. Looking back, for all those folks that had unrestricted, well, you are now more restricted! How does that feel? Worst part about it, there is no going back now that the can of worms has been opened.
The Bruen decision allowed for tighter gun control by leveraging the Supreme Court to bring forth the discussion, which then more judges will be allowed to review because of what some states like NY is doing. Which in turn will then change what occurred from the original Bruen 6-3 decision.
Think back before Bruen, there was no immediate discussion/changes, so it was status quo and the states had their laws.
Mark my words, none of this is good for the US in general; don't care where you live -- NY or not.
I've found through life experiences, sometimes you need to choose wisely what you want to make a big deal about. I've learned that sometimes you need to clam up and just deal with it even if you don't agree with it. This is one of them. Looking back, for all those folks that had unrestricted, well, you are now more restricted! How does that feel? Worst part about it, there is no going back now that the can of worms has been opened.
Whether SCOTUS took up Bruen or not, NYS was going to push more gun control. Don't for a minute think that Hochul was just going to stay with the status quo. Bruen may have caused her to react quickly and without mercy, but that also means that her law is full of problems which can be argued by our side. Your blaming the Bruen decision for all of this is misguided.
US RIFLE M1A
.45 acp
Agreed. NY was waiting for the Bruen decision to come down before passing CCIA. They were ready with it for some time prior.
Sure, FUKH signed it with a vindictive mindset, but it was going to happen regardless. Bruen actually puts gun owners in a better position than if it did no happen, because so much of the 'sensitive places' wording of Bruen declares the CCIA unconstitutional prior to it ever being signed.
Exactly just like the Safe-Act was sitting in a draw waiting for just the right time!!