Re: NYSRPA v. Bruen – SCOTUS Concealed Carry Case - Oral Arguments 11/3/21
Of course, both the previously mentioned ruling and this ruling are being appealed.
The liberal left is determined to violate the 2nd Amendment and other Constitutional Rights.
Judge Blocks NY Limits on Carrying Guns on Private Property
Wednesday, 23 November 2022
Quote:
A federal judge has blocked New York from restricting the carrying of guns on private property under a Democratic-backed law adopted following the U.S. Supreme Court's June ruling that struck down the state's strict gun permitting regime.
Tuesday's ruling by U.S. District Judge John Sinatra in Buffalo struck down a provision in the law that made it a felony for a licensed gun owner to possess a firearm on any private property unless the property owner allowed it with a sign or by giving express consent.
Sinatra, appointed by Republican former President Donald Trump, found that the provision violated the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment right to "keep and bear arms."
The ruling marked the latest courtroom victory for gun owners challenging New York's law, called the Concealed Carry Improvement Act, that as of Sept. 1 made obtaining a firearms license more difficult and barred firearms from a long list of "sensitive" public and private places. A federal appeals court has put on hold rulings by another judge that blocked major parts of the law including bars on people from carrying concealed guns in certain "sensitive locations."
Sinatra ruled in a lawsuit by two firearms owners and two gun rights groups. The Firearms Policy Coalition, one of those groups, called the ruling a "monumental step" toward restoring the gun rights of New Yorkers.
Sinatra said the provision at issue was unconstitutional under the Supreme Court's precedents including June's ruling.
"Property owners indeed have the right to exclude," Sinatra wrote. "But the state may not unilaterally exercise that right and, thereby, interfere with the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens who seek to carry for self-defense outside of their own homes."
In a court filing, the office of New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat, said it would appeal.
Re: NYSRPA v. Bruen – SCOTUS Concealed Carry Case - Oral Arguments 11/3/21
Still bouncing around the courts -
WHILE CITIZENS CONTINUE TO HAVE THEIR RIGHTS INFRINGED!!!
Supreme Court declines to block New York's gun control law -- for now
By Alex Swoyer - January 11, 2023
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...s-gun-control/
Quote:
The Supreme Court declined Wednesday to block parts of a New York law restricting the carrying of handguns in the state.
A group of New Yorkers asked the justices to undo a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit that allowed the state's gun control law to remain in place while courts consider the case.
A district court had ruled the new law is unconstitutional and infringed upon the Second Amendment, putting in place an injunction to block its enforcement. The new law was enacted days after the Supreme Court in June handed down its ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen which upended the state's prior gun control law.
The high court's move on Wednesday allows the injunction to be lifted and the law to be enforced.
There were no noted dissents with the court's decision. Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Clarence Thomas, though, issued a statement that the court is respecting the Second Circuit's process in lifting the injunction while it considers the lawsuit.
However, both justices signaled they are skeptical of the law.
"The New York law at issue in this application presents novel and serious questions under both the First and the Second Amendments," wrote Justice Alito, joined by Justice Thomas. "Applicants should not be deterred by today's order from again seeking relief if the Second Circuit does not, within a reasonable time, provide an explanation for its stay order or expedite consideration of the appeal."
The Supreme Court ruled in June that any gun control law should be upheld only if it is consistent with the nation's history and traditions related to the Second Amendment.
The historic ruling struck down New York's gun licensing scheme, which required people to show proper cause or a special need for carrying a gun for self-defense.
Justice Thomas, who wrote the Bruen opinion, said the law infringed on New Yorkers' Second Amendment rights.
New York lawmakers issued a revamped gun control measure days after the Supreme Court ruling. State lawmakers have made it nearly impossible to carry a firearm into any building -- public or private -- within the state.
The law, which took effect in September, eliminates a requirement to demonstrate a special need to obtain a license to carry. In its place, the state has issued a lengthy list of locations where guns are banned.
The move makes it nearly impossible to legally carry a firearm anywhere in the state.
It identifies "sensitive locations" as any local, state or federal government building, any health care facility, any place of worship, libraries, public parks, zoos or playgrounds, child care facilities and camps, homeless and family shelters, schools, public transportation, entertainment venues, museums, sports stadiums, concerts, polling places, protests and rallies.
It requires any private building to disclose whether an individual may carry a gun inside. Without permission from an owner, a gun holder could risk criminal prosecution for carrying a firearm inside a private establishment.
The case is Ivan Antonyuk v. Steven Nigrelli.
(Bolding is mine)
...
Re: NYSRPA v. Bruen – SCOTUS Concealed Carry Case - Oral Arguments 11/3/21
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ImminentDanger
they should correct the headline to Sotomayor rejected it. Thomas and Alito said they would be open to hearing the emergency case, which they can now that Sotomayor rejected it.
Re: NYSRPA v. Bruen – SCOTUS Concealed Carry Case - Oral Arguments 11/3/21
Quote:
Originally Posted by
akley88
they should correct the headline to Sotomayor rejected it. Thomas and Alito said they would be open to hearing the emergency case, which they can now that Sotomayor rejected it.
Justices Alito, Thomas Warn That N.Y. Gun Law Raises 'Serious' Questions
By Charlie McCarthy - 16 January 2023
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/su...16/id/1104551/
Quote:
Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas warn that New York's sweeping new gun law raises serious constitutional questions despite the high court's decision not to intercede while court challenges play out.
The Supreme Court last week issued an order allowing New York to continue enforcing the banning of guns from "sensitive places," such as schools and playgrounds, while a federal appeals court prepares to hear arguments challenging the law.
Alito and Thomas, two of the Supreme Court's most conservative members, issued a statement with the order saying the law "presents novel and serious questions under both the First and the Second Amendments."
"Applicants should not be deterred by today's order from again seeking relief" if the appeals court doesn't move swiftly or explain its actions, Alito wrote, joined by Thomas.
Gun owners wanted the Supreme Court to lift a federal appeals court order that temporarily put on hold a lower court decision blocking portions of the law, CNN reported.
Thomas in June authored the high court's New York State Rifle & Pistol, Inc. v. Bruen decision that struck down a New York law regulating who is allowed to carry a concealed weapon in public. The state then rewrote the law.
Now, there are four Second Amendment-related challenges to that law at the federal appeals court level. The 2nd Circuit, which holds a 7-6 Democratic-led majority, announced Friday it would hear arguments March 20 against several provisions in New York's law.
Wednesday's short unsigned Supreme Court order deferred to the 2nd Circuit, which in December eliminated a pause on several portions of the law after a federal district court judge struck down most of the law's provisions on Nov. 7, the Washington Examiner reported.
Alito and Thomas said the high court's order was to "reflect respect for the 2nd Circuit's procedures in managing its own docket," and in no way expressed views on the merits of the challenges brought by firearms proponents.
Josh Blackman, a professor at the South Texas College of Law, told the Examiner that the high court's decision not to take up the appeal from the 2nd Circuit was unsurprising given the Bruen precedent isn't even six months old.
"So I think what Alito was saying is, yes, this will take some time to work its way through the system. But the 2nd Circuit should be very mindful that they can't just sort of ignore Bruen; they have to sort of grapple with its decision," Blackman said.
Blackman told the Examiner that lower federal courts often try to read Second Amendment precedents narrowly, adding that he doesn't think "lower courts are going to like Bruen, especially in places like New York and New Jersey."
"What's new is that if the 2nd Circuit completely botches Bruen, the Supreme Court may intervene early," Blackman told the Examiner. "So I think there's an incentive for the 2nd Circuit to take very carefully what's in Bruen and not just sort of rely on old precedents."
(Bolding mine)
Hopefully, eventually, the courts will get it right --- BUT --- The USSC is supposed to protect THE PEOPLE from THE GOVERNMENT... When clearly unconstitutional laws are allowed to stand, even months (or days), for procedural reasons, that sacred obligation is violated! This is especially true of the 1st & 2nd Amendments that have such consequential affect on our every day lives.
Because of the determined efforts to destroy the 2A, no law related to the 2A, which 'shall not be infringed', should go into effect UNTIL AFTER it has preemptively been proven to pass Constitution Examination. Only after all appeals up thru the USSC should ANY LAW related to the 2A be activated - including administrative rulings in the Executive branch.
This constant assault on our Founding Rights should not be tolerated - even for a day!
...
Re: NYSRPA v. Bruen – SCOTUS Concealed Carry Case - Oral Arguments 11/3/21
Supreme Court Again Bypasses Chance to Block N.Y. Gun Law
By Jay Clemons - 18 January 2023
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/su...18/id/1104961/
Quote:
The U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday declined a request from New York-based firearms dealers to block portions of the state's concealed carry laws, which they claimed violated Second Amendment rights.
In its unsigned order, the nation's highest court included no public dissents in denying the dealers' request to obstruct parts of New York's gun law, which had imposed gun safety requirements on retailers, while a lower-court decision in favor of New York proceeds.
The Democratic-led NewYork Legislature passed some of the laws in June. Others were adopted the following month, after the Supreme Court struck down New York's limits on carrying concealed handguns outside the home, thus expanding gun rights.
This marks the second time in a week the Supreme Court has opted not to act on a New York gun law ruling. On Jan. 11, the court turned down a request to block other provisions of a similar law — without providing any additional comment.
In June, the justices determined the Second Amendment protects "an individual's right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home." Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion in that case, New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen. In its order, the court nixed a New York law aimed at requiring those seeking a license to carry a handgun in public to demonstrate that they had "proper cause."
According to NBC News, the June ruling also required courts to evaluate whether gun restrictions were "consistent with the nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation."
In the most recent case, Gazzola v. Hochul, firearms dealers challenged provisions of the New York law and an earlier one enacted in June before the Bruen decision, arguing they violated the Constitution and conflicted with federal law.
Judge Brenda K. Sannes of the U.S. District Court in Syracuse rejected the plaintiffs' request for a preliminary injunction. Also, the three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit unanimously refused to enter its own injunction while an appeal moved forward.
Various reports say measures challenged by the plaintiffs included:
Requiring security systems at gun stores.
Barring those under 18 from entering gun stores without a parent or guardian.
Requiring workers to be at least 21.
Requiring background checks for sales of ammunition.
USSC still allowing the state to infringe our 2A rights.
...
Re: NYSRPA v. Bruen – SCOTUS Concealed Carry Case - Oral Arguments 11/3/21
Call me a dickhead, but at this point Bruen isn't impressing me anymore than FOPA. It's just eating more of our tax dollars & donations
Re: NYSRPA v. Bruen – SCOTUS Concealed Carry Case - Oral Arguments 11/3/21
Possibly SCOTUS is giving the players a chance to get enough rope to hang themselves.
Re: NYSRPA v. Bruen – SCOTUS Concealed Carry Case - Oral Arguments 11/3/21
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ExFlyinguy
Call me a dickhead, but at this point Bruen isn't impressing me anymore than FOPA. It's just eating more of our tax dollars & donations
thats because there is nothing to hold states accountable for defying the rulings. this is how the game is played by states that get smacked. They generally just double down with something new that then requires a new lawsuit and gives them time to force their will on the citizens.
