It’s scheduled with SCOTUS

busykngt · Sep 21, 2019

First “gun case” in ten years will be heard by SCOTUS on 2 December!

This is the case where New York passed a law that severely restricted one’s ability to even remove a legal firearm from one’s residence. For instance, if you owned a pistol and wanted to attend a marksmanship match outside the city, you were not permitted to take or travel with your own pistol.

Once the law was appealed to SCOTUS and they agreed to hear the case, New York scrambled to modify and/or otherwise scrap the law. They then turned around and tried to convince SCOTUS, the law was scrapped and it was a moot point for SCOTUS to waste their time hearing the case.

Obviously SCOTUS did not agree. To help establish case law in such matters - restricting one’s Right to travel with an otherwise legal firearm - SCOTUS will hear the case and make a ruling.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...-supported-second-amendment-case-for-argument

V-Tach · Sep 21, 2019

Good...we'll see......staying hopeful they follow the Constitution.............

diesel1959 · Sep 21, 2019

Actually, it's scheduled for an October hearing to decide whether it will go forward with a hearing on the merits. I'm pretty sure we'd all like to see it proceed.

Renegade · Sep 21, 2019

5:4 with Roberts on our side.
5:4 with Roberts against us if they manage to define the gun as evil (in other words, Roberts with us if gun is S&W 6 shot revolver, Roberts against us if gun is Glock 17, TEC-9, etc).

TheMailMan · Sep 21, 2019

NYC is going to get spanked on this. However, it will probably result in a very narrow decision that only affects NYC.

candcallen · Sep 21, 2019

This probably wont go forward
If it does it will be worse than Kavanah hearing.

Younggun · Sep 21, 2019

candcallen said:
This probably wont go forward
If it does it will be worse than Kavanah hearing.

How?

Not like the senate will be sitting in on the case.

Hell, they’ve ruled on abortion since Kavanaugh was nominated without a circus around it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

candcallen · Sep 21, 2019

The supreme court doesnt rule on an issue that isnt there anymore. Doing so will ignite a sheit storm.

And before the "you're an anti gun liberal" retards start running their mouths, I neither think or feel that way. I also dont think the new York city tards should get off the hook just cause they realized they went too far.

I'm just saying that if the supreme court rules on a case where there is no longer a question because the law was changed they will be going beyond the norms and into activism and the left will explode. The court doesn't usually decide cases or even formally hear cases in situations like these. Regardless of your opinion of the issue this fact is unquestionable. They just dont hear cases that no longer exist.

Then again we have actual fascist doing things fascist historically do all while calling their victims fascists and getting away with it. It's a brave new world.

TheMailMan · Sep 22, 2019

candcallen said:
The supreme court doesnt rule on an issue that isnt there anymore. Doing so will ignite a sheit storm.

And before the "you're an anti gun liberal" retards start running their mouths, I neither think or feel that way. I also dont think the new York city tards should get off the hook just cause they realized they went too far.

I'm just saying that if the supreme court rules on a case where there is no longer a question because the law was changed they will be going beyond the norms and into activism and the left will explode. The court doesn't usually decide cases or even formally hear cases in situations like these. Regardless of your opinion of the issue this fact is unquestionable. They just dont hear cases that no longer exist.

Then again we have actual fascist doing things fascist historically do all while calling their victims fascists and getting away with it. It's a brave new world.

There's a legal doctrine that covers this, and SCOTUS has done so in the past.

oldag · Sep 22, 2019

All indications are that SCOTUS does intend to hear the case.

I just hope it is a broad ruling, rather than the super narrow rulings that have been recently issue.

Glenn B · Sep 22, 2019

For those thinking that the date has not been set or that SCOTUS will not hear the case becuase it is moot, the docket at this link shows the date for argument set at 12/02/2019. That seems to me like it is still set to go although I cannot speak to the veracity of the docket at the link. https://www.scotusblog.com/case-fil...-association-inc-v-city-of-new-york-new-york/

Glenn B · Sep 22, 2019

Did some more checking, the docket on the official SCOTUS site says that as of Sep 13 2019 the case is set for argument December 2, 2019. Source: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/18-280.html

vmax · Sep 22, 2019

V-Tach said:
Good...we'll see......staying hopeful they follow the Constitution.............

You know we are talking about our Supreme Court ...right?
Ginsberg, Sotamayor, Ginsburg.and the biggest liberal of them all Chief Justice Roberts

AustinN4 · Sep 22, 2019

vmax said:
Ginsberg, Sotamayor, Ginsburg.and the biggest liberal of them all Chief Justice Roberts

That is only 4 of nine.

toddnjoyce · Sep 22, 2019

Deimos said:
Post deleted by YG

What does his religion have to do with any of this?

benenglish · Sep 22, 2019

Thanks, YG.

oldag · Sep 22, 2019

vmax said:
You know we are talking about our Supreme Court ...right?
Ginsberg, Sotamayor, Ginsburg.and the biggest liberal of them all Chief Justice Roberts

I think Roberts' problem is he is too worried about how SCOTUS is perceived and he lets the liberal media affect him. At times (not always) he tries to "balance" the court rather than use the Constitution as his guide. And those are the occasions (which are a relatively small percentage of the cases) where he goes astray much to our disappointment.

diesel1959 · Sep 22, 2019

oldag said:
All indications are that SCOTUS does intend to hear the case.

I just hope it is a broad ruling, rather than the super narrow rulings that have been recently issue.

True. If the matter is truly mooted, then the Court can decline to hear the matter; however, it is for the Court to decide whether the issue is truly moot or not. Just my opinion; however, the actions of the City of New York indicate that they will act in their own best interest(s) and not necessarily in the interest of preserving an individual civil right. I predict the Court will not only hear the case, but it will spank the City.

#THESULLIVANACTNEEDSTOGO!

vmax · Sep 22, 2019

oldag said:
I think Roberts' problem is he is too worried about how SCOTUS is perceived and he lets the liberal media affect him. At times (not always) he tries to "balance" the court rather than use the Constitution as his guide. And those are the occasions (which are a relatively small percentage of the cases) where he goes astray much to our disappointment.

@AustinN4

I think Robert's problem in a nutshell is that he is a traitor to the people and the Constitution
He re-wrote Obamacare so it would be held up in court ...
Of the current Court the only ones I have any faith in upholding the Constitution is Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch.
So far Kavanaugh hasnt done a thing to make me think he is a true conservative

It’s scheduled with SCOTUS

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

TGT Addict

Watching While the Sheep Graze

por vida

SuperOwner

TGT Addict

Crotchety, Snarky, Truthful. You'll get over it.

Certified Jackass

Crotchety, Snarky, Truthful. You'll get over it.

TGT Addict

TGT Addict

Retired & Loving It

Retired & Loving It

TGT Addict

TGT Addict

TGT Addict

Just Another Boomer

TGT Addict

por vida

TGT Addict

Forum statistics