The Supreme Court has relisted ten Second Amendment cases following dismissal of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. City of New York. The Court had been holding the cases pending the outcome of of NY State Rifle & Pistol. There's a very brief description of the cases at Scotus Blog. I don't know much about any of these cases, but I'm thinking the California ban on new firearms might have the best chance of being struck down. I am hoping the Court will pick one that can more firmly address the standard of scrutiny courts should employ.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Supreme Court Relists Ten Second Amendment Cases
- Thread starter KyJim
- Start date
They did, but they did not take any in the latest round.
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/what-do-todays-supreme-court-non-decisions-mean-for-gun-rights/
So, we wait...and wait...and wait...
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/what-do-todays-supreme-court-non-decisions-mean-for-gun-rights/
So, we wait...and wait...and wait...
We will see in less than 24 hours if anything comes out of last Thursday's 's conference relists (I think we are up to three conferences running on the 10 2A cases).
The largest group is may v shall concealed carry regime, five to six cases on that with an exist 4:1 split with DC causing split base albeit on panel and not full court.
I personally think the downside on shall/may in SCOTUS has been underestimated. I've read some commentators on the 2A side saying here is no downside since outcomes are loss resulting in status quo ante (most states already being shall issue) and upside being Ma., Md., N.J., parts of Conn and Cali. forced to shall regime.
But there are a number of now blue states that are shall that can be expected to go to may over the next few years if SCOTUS (read Roberts) allows may to stand given the massive number of state legislator IOU's Mike Bloomberg is now holding.
I find it plausable that Alito, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and Thomas are trying to figure out which of these -- shall/may, AR as common, mag cpacity, interstate sales, microstamp/roster -- if any, Roberts will support. I know we would like to think these are decided on merits, but there is no intellectually honest way to get away from the fact that they are not. Outliers like Roberts and Kennedy aside, few areas correlate as strongly based on what party made an appointment.
The largest group is may v shall concealed carry regime, five to six cases on that with an exist 4:1 split with DC causing split base albeit on panel and not full court.
I personally think the downside on shall/may in SCOTUS has been underestimated. I've read some commentators on the 2A side saying here is no downside since outcomes are loss resulting in status quo ante (most states already being shall issue) and upside being Ma., Md., N.J., parts of Conn and Cali. forced to shall regime.
But there are a number of now blue states that are shall that can be expected to go to may over the next few years if SCOTUS (read Roberts) allows may to stand given the massive number of state legislator IOU's Mike Bloomberg is now holding.
I find it plausable that Alito, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and Thomas are trying to figure out which of these -- shall/may, AR as common, mag cpacity, interstate sales, microstamp/roster -- if any, Roberts will support. I know we would like to think these are decided on merits, but there is no intellectually honest way to get away from the fact that they are not. Outliers like Roberts and Kennedy aside, few areas correlate as strongly based on what party made an appointment.