Posts Tagged Supreme Court

CDC Director Disputes Sotomayor’s Covid Claims

From NTD:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Rochelle Walenksy disputed Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s claim that 100,000 children are hospitalized or seriously ill with COVID-19 during arguments last week.

During an interview with “Fox News Sunday,” Walensky confirmed there are about 3,500 children in the hospital and who tested positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

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

Interview with Sharone Mitchell Jr. of the Cook County Public Defenders on NY Gun Case

From Slate’s What Next podcast:

, , , , , , , , ,

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

New York’s Gun Restrictions Are Modern Jim Crow

From Reason:

Next week the Supreme Court will consider a challenge to a New York law similar to the Alabama statute that empowered local officials like Butler to decide who could exercise the constitutional right to bear arms. The briefs urging the Court to overturn New York’s statute include several from African-American organizations that emphasize the long black tradition of armed self-defense, the racist roots of gun control laws, and their disproportionate impact on racial and ethnic minorities.

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

No Comments

NY Right To Carry Law Heads To Supreme Court in Nov

From Bearing Arms:

Mark your calendars for Wednesday, November 3rd. That’s when the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a supremely important case dealing with the right to keep and bear arms. The nine justices will hear from New York Attorney General Letitia James, who’ll be defending that state’s restrictive and subjective “may issue” laws regarding concealed carry permits, as well as former Solicitor General Paul Clement, who’s representing the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association and several of its members who’ve been denied a carry license from the issuing authorities in their home counties.

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

Citizens Comment On NY Supreme Court Case

From Cam and Company:

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Gun Rights Groups File Amicus Briefs In NY Carry Case

From Ammoland:

Two national gun rights organizations—the Second Amendment Foundation and its grassroots sibling, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms—have filed separate amicus briefs to the U.S. Supreme Court in support of a challenge of New York State’s ultra-restrictive carry laws by the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (NYSRPA)

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Pistol Braces And The Heller Case

From The Federalist:

However, as explained hereHeller erred in at least two respects. First, it misinterpreted the Supreme Court’s decision in U.S. v. Miller (1939). Miller indicated that the right to keep and bear arms includes all arms that “have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia,” such as those that are “part of the ordinary military equipment” and any others the use of which “could contribute to the common defense.”

Miller also noted that militiamen were historically “expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time,” so Heller ignored the discussion of military and militia arms and instead concluded that Miller limited the right to arms to those “in common use.”

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

No Comments