Posts Tagged New York State Rifle & Pistol Association

Restitution Should Be A Remedy For Unconstitutional Prosecutions

From The Truth About Guns:

An individual should not be punished for noncompliance with an unconstitutional law. If they were unjustly punished, then they deserve restitution. So far, only a few people have applied for restitution in DC. There is a larger class action lawsuit that needs to be filed against the district.

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Public Defenders Join With Gun Rights Activists

From Slate:

Mitchell is one of a number of public defenders who’ve sided with Second Amendment activists on this case. They argue that restrictive licensing, combined with a police force that is eager to charge Black and brown people with weapons possession, adds up to mass incarceration, and that loosening gun restrictions might right a tremendous wrong. On a recent episode of What Next, I spoke to Mitchell about why he opposes laws criminalizing gun possession, how he thinks about his right-wing allies in this case, and what he believes government should be doing to stop gun violence. Our conversation has been condensed and edited for clarity.

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

Six Takeaways From The NY Gun Case

From The Federalist:

While New York conceded the Second Amendment applies beyond one’s threshold, Solicitor General Barbara Underwood quickly forgot that the Bill of Rights protects rights—it doesn’t define privileges. For instance, in discussing the regulation of firearms outside the home, Underwood started to say that “these regulations are all an effort to accommodate the right,” but then backtracked, saying the regulations seek to “respect the right of self-defense.”

The slip of the tongue was telling, however: It means New York state doesn’t truly view the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms as a right, but as a privilege it will accommodate — when governmental officials deem it appropriate.

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

The Effect Of Dread Scott On The New York Gun Case

From The Federalist:

Dred Scott has several implications for the Bruen case. First, it affirms that the Second Amendment right to bear arms is a normal individual right, like the other individual rights listed in the case, such as free exercise of religion, freedom of speech and of the press, jury trial, and so on.

Dred Scott refutes the notion that bans on bearing arms were the norm in the United States (or in any State). According to Dred Scott, American citizens have always had the right “to keep and carry arms wherever they went”—so recognizing blacks as citizens would mean recognizing their right to bear arms.

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

We The People Podcast Discusses SCOTUS NY Gun Case

From The National Constitution Center:

On this week’s episode, host Jeffrey Rosen is joined by two legal scholars who filed briefs on opposing sides of the case—Judge J. Michael Luttig who filed in support of Bruen, and David Kopel who filed in support of the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association. They detail the arguments they made in their briefs as well as what’s at stake in this case, and debate how to interpret the text, history, and meaning of the Second Amendment in light of whether the Court should uphold the New York law.

, , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

SCOTUS Creates Dangerous Precedent By Declaring NY Gun Case Moot

From Bearing Arms:

The 6-3 ruling saw Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh siding with the liberal wing of the court, while Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch dissented from the opinion, arguing that the decision “permits our docket to be manipulated in a way that should not be countenanced.”

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Opinion: New York Gun Case Is Silly

From The New York Times:

I don’t know how the Second Amendment case the Supreme Court heard this week will turn out, but I do know this: If the subject weren’t so serious, the case in its current posture, with substantial doubt about whether there is even a dispute left for the court to decide, would be downright funny. For a window into the dynamics of today’s Supreme Court, look no further than the transcript of the argument in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. City of New York.

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Anti-gunners Don’t Know What They’re Protesting

From Townhall:

It’s almost as though they were bussed in for the event, given signs and told to stand there and look angry. The National Rifle Association’s social media team asked anti-gunners the name of the case and what the case was about and none of them seemed to know. Shocker, right?

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

NRA Board Member Comes Out Against 80% Guns

From The Truth About Guns:

…The head of the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association said the sale of ghost guns is a growing problem.
“These ’80 percent’ guns are providing a way for prohibited people to buy a firearm,” Tom King of the NYSRPA said, referring to people who don’t have a gun permit or are otherwise prohibited from possessing a gun.

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

NY Gun Case Set For Argument On Dec. 2

From NRA-ILA:

Now, it seems, their reckoning may be nigh, as the high court has scheduled the case for argument on Dec. 2.
The lawsuit, New York State Rifle & Pistol Assoc., Inc. v. City of New York, offers a revealing look into the mindset of gun control extremists, and in particular, their refusal to acknowledge the Supreme Court’s precedents that recognize the right to keep and bear arms as a fundamental, individual liberty.

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

First 2nd Amendment Supreme Court Case Since Heller

From National Constitution Center:

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments