New York State rifle SCOTUS case granted certiorari

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • KG1

    Forgotten Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    25,633
    149
    I guess as a corollary result of this decision there is movement in Cali. on the issue of "assault" weapon bans in which the 9th circuit is remanding it back to the lower district court with instructions to apply guidelines consistent with the SCOTUS decision.

     
    Last edited:

    KG1

    Forgotten Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    25,633
    149
    Looks like more good things are happening as a result of this decision. SCOTUS has granted certiorari in several cases vacating the decisions and remanding them back down to the lower courts with instructions to apply the guidelines outlined in the recent 2A decision.

    I think a couple of them were magazine ban related in NJ and Cali and one was related to an assault weapon case I believe in Maryland and another carry related case in Hawaii. Anyway, here is a video that goes into the details.

     
    Last edited:

    chipbennett

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 18, 2014
    10,943
    113
    Avon
    Looks like more good things are happening as a result of this decision. SCOTUS has granted certiorari in several cases vacating the decisions and remanding them back down to the lower courts with instructions to apply the guidelines outlined in the recent 2A decision.

    I think a couple of them were magazine ban related in NJ and Cali and one was related to an assault weapon case I believe in Maryland and another carry related case in Hawaii. Anyway, here is a video that goes into the details.


    Yes, per TTAG:

    Young v. Hawaii — Challenges Hawaii’s ban on open carry as infringing citizens’ Second Amendment right to bear firearms outside the home.

    Bianchi v. Frosh — Challenges Maryland’s “assault weapons” ban under Heller’s common use language.

    ANJRPC v. Grewal — Challenges New Jersey’s “high capacity” magazine ban for violating the Second Amendment, the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment, and the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

    Duncan v. Bonta — Challenges California’s “high capacity” magazine ban as violating the Second and Fifth Amendments as well as the two-step interest-balancing process explicitly repudiated in the Bruen ruling.
     

    JAL

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 14, 2017
    2,161
    113
    Indiana
    Looks like more good things are happening as a result of this decision. SCOTUS has granted certiorari in several cases vacating the decisions and remanding them back down to the lower courts with instructions to apply the guidelines outlined in the recent 2A decision.

    I think a couple of them were magazine ban related in NJ and Cali and one was related to an assault weapon case I believe in Maryland and another carry related case in Hawaii. Anyway, here is a video that goes into the details.


    This goes along with the 9th Ckt Court remanding Rupp v Bonta, the Calif. Assault Weapons Ban challenge, back to the Central Calif. District Court that had ruled in favor of Bonta (versus the two San Diego cases). I expect there will be more of them from various Ckt Courts. When a GVR (Grant hearing or certiorari, vacate and remand) occurs, it's the higher court telling the lower one to revisit their decision - that it won't stand as-is.
     
    Last edited:

    KG1

    Forgotten Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    25,633
    149
    I guess all these cases have been on hold pending the outcome of this case and they were basically in layman’s terms vacated and sent back down the chain for a redo with instructions to apply the guidelines outlined in this decision.

    This decision in our favor was vitally important and set the wheels in motion back our way.
     

    Cameramonkey

    www.thechosen.tv
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    35   0   0
    May 12, 2013
    31,687
    77
    Camby area
    I guess all these cases have been on hold pending the outcome of this case and they were basically in layman’s terms vacated and sent back down the chain for a redo with instructions to apply the guidelines outlined in this decision.

    This decision in our favor was vitally important and set the wheels in motion back our way.
    Yes. The court's way of saying "We already answered this question. We dont need to write another opinion. Go back and use our recent precedent to make your ruling. "
     
    • Like
    Reactions: JAL

    KG1

    Forgotten Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    25,633
    149
    Of great import is how Thomas wrote his decision regarding how to interpret 2nd Amendment when scrutinizing various 2nd Amendment related laws.

    John
    Yep the lower courts are going to have a difficult time coming up with a valid decision to uphold any bans or restrictions related to common arms and ammunition now. There were no restrictions associated within the historical text of the 2nd amendment banning types of arms nor were there any historical restrictions placed on ammunition.
     

    KLB

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Sep 12, 2011
    23,009
    77
    Porter County
    Yep the lower courts are going to have a difficult time coming up with a valid decision to uphold any bans or restrictions related to common arms and ammunition now. There were no restrictions associated within the historical text of the 2nd amendment banning types of arms nor were there any historical restrictions placed on ammunition.
    In the grand scheme, that is an even bigger win than the destruction of the may issue laws.
     

    BigRed

    Banned More Than You
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Dec 29, 2017
    18,922
    149
    1,000 yards out
    Of great import is how Thomas wrote his decision regarding how to interpret 2nd Amendment when scrutinizing various 2nd Amendment related laws.

    John


    I have said it before....I will say it again. Thomas was endowed by his Creator with a brilliant mind. That is a damn rare quality on that bench.
     

    BigRed

    Banned More Than You
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Dec 29, 2017
    18,922
    149
    1,000 yards out
    This goes along with the 9th Ckt Court remanding the Calif. Assault Weapons Ban back to the Calif. District Court. I expect there will be more of them from various Ckt Courts. When a GVR (Grant hearing or certiorari, vacate and remand) occurs, it's the higher court telling the lower one to revisit their decision - that it won't stand as-is.

    Good video.

    BTW, if the aff is "in for an *** kicking" as the man in the video says, I hope it ends up rinsing its mouth with a bidet.
     

    KG1

    Forgotten Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    25,633
    149
    NJ is trying to pull their same old shenanigans in defiance of the SCOTUS ruling. Things like guns and ammo registries and microstamping etc....

     

    JAL

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 14, 2017
    2,161
    113
    Indiana
    NJ is trying to pull their same old shenanigans in defiance of the SCOTUS ruling. Things like guns and ammo registries and microstamping etc....


    California, New York and New Jersey are throwing tantrums over the SCOTUS decision. I expect this stuff will all get knocked down. New York lost the "Beretta" nuisance case last December, but they're at it again. NY claims to have "won" in Federal Court on it but the case was dismissed on more technical issues. It will assuredly be challenged now that NY AG has filed her lawsuit.

    John
     
    • Like
    Reactions: KG1

    KG1

    Forgotten Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    25,633
    149
    This goes along with the 9th Ckt Court remanding Rupp v Bonta, the Calif. Assault Weapons Ban challenge, back to the Central Calif. District Court that had ruled in favor of Bonta (versus the two San Diego cases). I expect there will be more of them from various Ckt Courts. When a GVR (Grant hearing or certiorari, vacate and remand) occurs, it's the higher court telling the lower one to revisit their decision - that it won't stand as-is.
    There's a good chance that an end may be in sight to the California "assault weapons" ban.

    There's been a motion filed on behalf of the plaintiff for the 9th circuit to lift the stay they imposed in Miller v. Bonta and to affirm the decision made in the case decided by Judge Benitez.

    Judge Benitez ruled that the CA law banning "assault weapons" was unconstitutional based upon a one-step Constitutional analysis even before SCOTUS made it a thing

    Judge Benitez originally issued a temporary stay on his own decision pending appeal. It was then bumped up to the 9th circuit on appeal where they extended a stay basically determining CA had a likelihood that the ruling would be overturned in their favor based on the merits. The problem is in determining that they used the old two step approach that they preferred which is no longer valid per the recent SCOTUS decision and the Benitez one step decision turned out to fall in line within SCOTUS guidelines.

    The Miller v Bonta appeal has been on hold because of the Rupp v Bonta appeal but now that it has been remanded back down to the lower court by the 9th circuit it clears the path for Miller v Bonta to proceed.

    Just as an added background note to those who may be unfamiliar with the two separate cases, they both involve the CA "assault weapons" ban. In the Rupp v Bonta case, the Judge ruled in favor of the State upholding the ban using a two-step approach.

    Subsequently in Miller v Bonta the Judge in that case ruled against the State in favor of the plaintiff striking down the ban using the one-step Constitutional approach which is the current valid method recognized by the recent SCOTUS ruling.

     
    Last edited:

    KG1

    Forgotten Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    25,633
    149
    Now Delaware has jumped into the fray with both feet passing several soon to be unconstitutional gun control bills. Just more fodder to be litigated.

    It's like a bunch of monkeys flinging poo in all directions now in defiance of SCOTUS.

     
    Last edited:

    JAL

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 14, 2017
    2,161
    113
    Indiana
    Now Delaware has jumped into the fray with both feet passing several soon to be unconstitutional gun control bills. Just more fodder to be litigated.

    It's like a bunch of monkeys flinging poo in all directions now in defiance of SCOTUS.


    Reminds me of two year-olds throwing violent tantrums in the grocery store, kicking and shrieking on the floor, because mommy wouldn't buy the gummy bears. They're pandering to their political base, to whip them into a frenzy to volunteer for campaigns and deliver votes.

    John
     

    actaeon277

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Nov 20, 2011
    92,863
    113
    Merrillville
    Reminds me of two year-olds throwing violent tantrums in the grocery store, kicking and shrieking on the floor, because mommy wouldn't buy the gummy bears. They're pandering to their political base, to whip them into a frenzy to volunteer for campaigns and deliver votes.

    John
     
    • Like
    Reactions: JAL
    Top Bottom