Posts Tagged scotus

Supreme Court Refuses To Grant 2A Rights Nationally

From Fox News:

In a stirring victory for those who live in the national’s capital, a panel of the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals recently threw out a D.C. ordinance that denied concealed-carry permits to anyone who could not show a “special” need for self-defense, what is referred to as a “good reason” requirement.  The problem is that other courts of appeal have upheld such restrictive laws and the U.S. Supreme Court has turned down appeals of those decisions, refusing to take up the issue of the Second Amendment’s application to carrying a weapon outside of the home.

This happened most recently at the very end of the Supreme Court’s 2017 term in June when it refused to take up Peruta v. California, an appeal of a decision of the Ninth Circuit upholding California’s good reason requirement.

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Second Amendment Headed To Supremes In 2017

From Breitbart.com:

For the first time in U.S. history, a federal appeals court on Friday struck down a federal gun-control law for violating the Second Amendment, meaning that next year the Supreme Court will hear a case that includes the opportunity to abolish citizens’ right to bear arms by overruling the Court’s famous Heller precedent.

That means the Obama administration’s solicitor general will now petition the U.S. Supreme Court to grant certiorari to review this case. Under these rare circumstances, it is virtually 100 percent certain that the justices will grant review and hear the case.

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Supreme Court Chips Away At Fourth Amendment

From Rare.us:

On Monday, SCOTUS continued this assault on the Fourth Amendment. It concluded that even when the government admits a stop was illegal, it can still use that evidence to prosecute you.

Under Heien, the cops only had to prove reasonable ignorance of the law: “I didn’t realize stopping this person was illegal, but I found this evidence, so we should use it.”

Now, under Monday’s Utah v. Strieff, even that charade is no longer necessary. Police can simply say: “Yeah, that stop was illegal, but I found this evidence, so we should use it.”

This is all the more reason for citizens to familiarize themselves with jury nullification. You can learn more about it from the Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA).

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

SCOTUS Nominee Garland Not Fond Of Guns

From The Washington Times:

In one 2000 case, Judge Garland, who sits on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, upheld a Clinton administrationeffort to store gun-buyers’ records.

 Later in the decade, he joined other judges in a failed bid to reconsider the landmark case that would eventually establish the Second Amendment’s protection of a personal right to bear arms.

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Supreme Court Declines To Hear San Fran Gun Case

By declining to hear the case the Supreme Court has essentially given the “thumbs up” to this law and signaled to other cities that they may do the same.

From Yahoo News:

By declining to hear an appeal filed by gun owners and the National Rifle Association, the court left intact a March 2014 ruling by the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld the measure.

The regulation, issued in 2007, states that anyone who keeps a handgun at home must either store it in a locked container or disable it with a trigger lock.

 

 

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Supreme Court Debates Taking San Francisco Gun Control Case

From Reason.com:

Will the Supreme Court allow the 9th Circuit to openly flout one of its precedents? We may soon find out. Today the justices are meeting in private conference. Among the items scheduled for consideration is a petition filed by conservative lawyer Paul Clement seeking review of the 9th Circuit’s Jackson opinion. “The decision below is impossible to reconcile with this Court’s decision inHeller,” that petition observes. “The Court of Appeals’ conclusion that San Francisco may venture where this Court forbade the District of Columbia to go is so patently wrong that summary reversal would be appropriate.”

 

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Supreme Court Needs To Clarify Second Amendment

From CATO:

While Heller clarified that the Second Amendment secures an individual right, the ruling left many questions about the scope of that right unanswered. Since then, several courts have made clear that they plan to take only as much from Heller as they absolutely have to.

Since Heller struck down D.C.’s ban on functional firearms in the home, recalcitrant courts pretend that the Second Amendment is limited to the right to keep arms and that legislatures can for very little (or no) reason to ignore the right to bear them outside the home.

, , , , , , ,

No Comments