SCOTUS: to rule on gun rights

As the name indicates, this is the place for gun-related political discussions. It is not open to other political topics.

Moderators: Charles L. Cotton, carlson1


Topic author
philip964
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 9900
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:30 pm

SCOTUS: to rule on gun rights

#1

Post by philip964 » Sun Dec 01, 2019 7:15 pm

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 251054002/

USA Today shaking. They may expand gun rights.


srothstein
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 4185
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:27 pm
Location: Luling, TX

Re: SCOTUS: to rule on gun rights

#2

Post by srothstein » Sun Dec 01, 2019 11:43 pm

I am surprised that SCOTUS is keeping the case alive. I thought it would die as a moot case when the state law was passed banning cities from those types of restrictions. I saw two explanations for why the case is going to be heard still:

1. SCOTUS hates when cities or states try to manipulate the court by repealing laws to make cases moot. It is a trick that allows the laws to stand in other places and the city could reimpose the same or a very similar law.

2. The two new conservative justices (Kavanaugh and Gorsuch) are really pro-gun and want to make a ruling to help with carry rights. If this is true, expect a fairly general and far-reaching ruling. It may even deal a death blow to may issue permitting schemes.

I have to say that I doubt this case would be heard without Kavanaugh and Gorsuch being there. And for that, though I may not like his behavior or agree on all his positions, I have to say thank you to President Trump for nominating them and standing behind them throughout the confirmation process.
Steve Rothstein


1911 Raptor
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:56 am

Re: SCOTUS: to rule on gun rights

#3

Post by 1911 Raptor » Mon Dec 02, 2019 6:23 am

srothstein wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 11:43 pm
I am surprised that SCOTUS is keeping the case alive. I thought it would die as a moot case when the state law was passed banning cities from those types of restrictions. I saw two explanations for why the case is going to be heard still:

1. SCOTUS hates when cities or states try to manipulate the court by repealing laws to make cases moot. It is a trick that allows the laws to stand in other places and the city could reimpose the same or a very similar law.

2. The two new conservative justices (Kavanaugh and Gorsuch) are really pro-gun and want to make a ruling to help with carry rights. If this is true, expect a fairly general and far-reaching ruling. It may even deal a death blow to may issue permitting schemes.

I have to say that I doubt this case would be heard without Kavanaugh and Gorsuch being there. And for that, though I may not like his behavior or agree on all his positions, I have to say thank you to President Trump for nominating them and standing behind them throughout the confirmation process.
Don’t bank on Chief Justice John Roberts siding with the right on this case.


chasfm11
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 3602
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:01 pm
Location: Northern DFW

Re: SCOTUS: to rule on gun rights

#4

Post by chasfm11 » Mon Dec 02, 2019 6:49 am

This case could be better than Peruta if the decision goes the way that Steve suggests.
6/23-8/13/10 -51 days to plastic
Dum Spiro, Spero

User avatar

RoyGBiv
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 7988
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:41 am
Location: Fort Worth

Re: SCOTUS: to rule on gun rights

#5

Post by RoyGBiv » Mon Dec 02, 2019 11:48 am

SCOTUS oral arguments are still not televised, right?

Working from home today. Would like to watch.
I am not a lawyer. This is NOT legal advice.!
Image
Nothing tempers idealism quite like the cold bath of reality.... SQLGeek

User avatar

Flightmare
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 2443
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 7:00 pm
Location: Plano, TX

Re: SCOTUS: to rule on gun rights

#6

Post by Flightmare » Mon Dec 02, 2019 12:04 pm

RoyGBiv wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 11:48 am
SCOTUS oral arguments are still not televised, right?

Working from home today. Would like to watch.
That is correct. Which means unless we're in the room, we have to wait and see if someone made an audio tape or the judicial opinion to be released.
Deplorable lunatic since 2016

User avatar

Jago668
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 930
Joined: Sun May 03, 2015 12:31 am

Re: SCOTUS: to rule on gun rights

#7

Post by Jago668 » Mon Dec 02, 2019 12:06 pm



Video of a guy that was in the room.
NRA Benefactor Member


LDP
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2018 6:15 pm

Re: SCOTUS: to rule on gun rights

#8

Post by LDP » Mon Dec 02, 2019 12:28 pm

Should we write an urgent letter to Santa?
I hope SCOTUS makes the right decision. (instead of the left/wrong decision)
Keeping my fingers crossed!


dlh
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 742
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 12:16 pm

Re: SCOTUS: to rule on gun rights

#9

Post by dlh » Mon Dec 02, 2019 12:44 pm

srothstein wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 11:43 pm
I am surprised that SCOTUS is keeping the case alive. I thought it would die as a moot case when the state law was passed banning cities from those types of restrictions. I saw two explanations for why the case is going to be heard still:

1. SCOTUS hates when cities or states try to manipulate the court by repealing laws to make cases moot. It is a trick that allows the laws to stand in other places and the city could reimpose the same or a very similar law.

2. The two new conservative justices (Kavanaugh and Gorsuch) are really pro-gun and want to make a ruling to help with carry rights. If this is true, expect a fairly general and far-reaching ruling. It may even deal a death blow to may issue permitting schemes.

I have to say that I doubt this case would be heard without Kavanaugh and Gorsuch being there. And for that, though I may not like his behavior or agree on all his positions, I have to say thank you to President Trump for nominating them and standing behind them throughout the confirmation process.
The Supremes may say, as they did in Heller, that these laws violate all three tests (the rational basis, intermediate scrutiny, and strict scrutiny standards) and accordingly find them unconstitutional. This might be an attractive option from their standpoint as it kicks the can down the road regarding which of the three tests has to be used and avoids in-fighting on which test is proper.
Please know and follow the rules of firearms safety.

User avatar

mojo84
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 8998
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 4:07 pm
Location: Boerne, TX (Kendall County)

Re: SCOTUS: to rule on gun rights

#10

Post by mojo84 » Mon Dec 02, 2019 3:03 pm

Looks like at least one of the justices may think it is a moot point.

https://dailycaller.com/2019/12/02/supr ... -argument/
Note: Me sharing a link and information published by others does not constitute my endorsement, agreement, disagreement, my opinion or publishing by me. If you do not like what is contained at a link I share, take it up with the author or publisher of the content.


jason812
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:41 pm
Location: Central Texas

Re: SCOTUS: to rule on gun rights

#11

Post by jason812 » Mon Dec 02, 2019 3:28 pm

mojo84 wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 3:03 pm
Looks like at least one of the justices may think it is a moot point.

https://dailycaller.com/2019/12/02/supr ... -argument/
It would appear that the city changed it's laws/rules after the case was taken to the Supreme Court. It also appears that this was done to get the case thrown out. I'm guessing it is due to fear NYC would lose the case. If the case is dropped before a ruling can be made, the city gets to keep it's other 2A infractions in place. If the court rules the way we would like, NYC could lose all of it's anti 2A laws. I believe the city is trying to maintain its power over the citizens by trying to get the case dropped.


Soccerdad1995
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 3887
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:03 pm

Re: SCOTUS: to rule on gun rights

#12

Post by Soccerdad1995 » Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:04 pm

mojo84 wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 3:03 pm
Looks like at least one of the justices may think it is a moot point.

https://dailycaller.com/2019/12/02/supr ... -argument/
That's Ginsberg. She stopped being a real justice a long time ago, if she ever was one. She is an activist who happens to wear the robe of a SC justice.

Trump will replace her with an actual justice next term.
Ding dong, the witch is dead


jb2012
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 888
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 1:12 pm

Re: SCOTUS: to rule on gun rights

#13

Post by jb2012 » Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:13 pm

Soccerdad1995 wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:04 pm
mojo84 wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 3:03 pm
Looks like at least one of the justices may think it is a moot point.

https://dailycaller.com/2019/12/02/supr ... -argument/
That's Ginsberg. She stopped being a real justice a long time ago, if she ever was one. She is an activist who happens to wear the robe of a SC justice.

Trump will replace her with an actual justice next term.
I sure hope so. There’s no way she won’t retire within the next 5 years, but I also question how she’s still sitting on the stand today.


crazy2medic
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1672
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2015 9:59 am

Re: SCOTUS: to rule on gun rights

#14

Post by crazy2medic » Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:49 pm

jb2012 wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:13 pm
Soccerdad1995 wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:04 pm
mojo84 wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 3:03 pm
Looks like at least one of the justices may think it is a moot point.

https://dailycaller.com/2019/12/02/supr ... -argument/
That's Ginsberg. She stopped being a real justice a long time ago, if she ever was one. She is an activist who happens to wear the robe of a SC justice.

Trump will replace her with an actual justice next term.
I sure hope so. There’s no way she won’t retire within the next 5 years, but I also question how she’s still sitting on the stand today.
With her constant in and out of the hospital over the last year I highly doubt she has a year much less 5 years!
Government, like fire is a dangerous servant and a fearful master
If you ain't paranoid you ain't paying attention

User avatar

mojo84
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 8998
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 4:07 pm
Location: Boerne, TX (Kendall County)

Re: SCOTUS: to rule on gun rights

#15

Post by mojo84 » Mon Dec 02, 2019 5:59 pm

Soccerdad1995 wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:04 pm
mojo84 wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 3:03 pm
Looks like at least one of the justices may think it is a moot point.

https://dailycaller.com/2019/12/02/supr ... -argument/
That's Ginsberg. She stopped being a real justice a long time ago, if she ever was one. She is an activist who happens to wear the robe of a SC justice.

Trump will replace her with an actual justice next term.
According to the article, it may also be Roberts.
Note: Me sharing a link and information published by others does not constitute my endorsement, agreement, disagreement, my opinion or publishing by me. If you do not like what is contained at a link I share, take it up with the author or publisher of the content.

Post Reply

Return to “Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues”