Posted on 07/06/2015 8:28:50 AM PDT by PROCON
On June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges, which concerned whether same-sex marriage is a right protected by the U.S. Constitution. Although the case did not address the right to bear arms, some pro-gun advocates began debating whether the Court’s reasoning and analysis had application to national concealed carry licensing reciprocity.
This is a reasonable question. If states that formerly did not sanction same-sex marriage now have to recognize all marriages from states that do, shouldn’t that also mean restrictive “may issue” concealed carry jurisdictions have to recognize concealed carry licenses from less restrictive “shall-issue” jurisdictions? Some commentators went even further, insisting that Obergefell has conclusively settled the national reciprocity issue in favor of gun owners.
Unfortunately, the answer is not that simple. In particular, we strongly advise concealed carry license holders not to assume Obergefell provides them with the legal basis they need to carry without an in-state license in strongly anti-gun states such as Maryland, New Jersey, or New York. Doing so at this point would still subject the traveler to arrest and criminal prosecution.
This is so for a number of reasons, chief of which is that the U.S. Supreme Court has not yet ruled squarely on the question of whether the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a loaded handgun in public, and if it does, whether states must recognize each other’s permits. The landmark cases of Heller and McDonald only concerned the question of handgun possession in the home.
Until the Supreme Court rules on the issue conclusively, certain reliably anti-gun jurisdictions can be counted on to exist in a state of denial and defiance. If states and lower courts can ignore a congressional statute like Firearm Owners’ Protection Act – and they do – they certainly can ignore arguments that the philosophical bases for interstate recognition of same-sex marriage compel interstate recognition of concealed carry permits.
But there is a lesson gun owners can draw from Obergefell. An uncontested fact mentioned in Chief Justice Roberts’s dissent in the case is that no society was known to have permitted same-sex marriage before 2001. Now, in 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court has found it to be a fundamental right that cannot be overturned by any state legislature or popular referendum. Whatever one’s view of same-sex marriage, the incredible shift in this area shows what is possible when people dedicate themselves to a common cause.
That is the true lesson of the Obergefell decision for gun owners, who should not rest until Second Amendment rights are similarly respected in all 50 states. That is why the NRA will continue to lead the fight in the legislative, legal and political arenas to secure national right to carry reciprocity so that all Americans can defend themselves everywhere they are legally entitled to be.
Pretty much spot on. The argument doesn’t work (yet) that Obergefell applies and (at this point) is such a bad argument that it distracts and is fodder for the other side.
They are trying to warn the idiots that SHOULD doesn’t mean DOES.
bfl
Rules and consistency DO NOT MATTER ONE WHIT to them. It's all about power and enforcing obedience. That's all.
One might think a state issued drivers licence that is accepted by every state would be a more appropriate comparison, although you do technically require a licence to get married.
Just wait until next news cycle, the rules will change to further The Agenda once again.
>>Until the Supreme Court rules on the issue conclusively, certain reliably anti-gun jurisdictions can be counted on to exist in a state of denial and defiance. <<
They will have to line up behind the poly and incest marriage license filers, but yes we have to wait for SCOTUS to rule or explain why reciprocity/equal protections is so limited as to be meaningless.
If the judicial system gives itself permission to rule any way it pleases, no matter what the law or the Constitution say, then no matter how they may have justified recent rulings, it would be very foolish to imagine that this system will allow itself to be held to any of that when someone presents a case that would take the system in a direction that it does not want to go.
“If the judicial system gives itself permission to rule any way it pleases, no matter what the law or the Constitution say, then no matter how they may have justified recent rulings, it would be very foolish to imagine that this system will allow itself to be held to any of that when someone presents a case that would take the system in a direction that it does not want to go”.
Which means the national reciprocity idea is a fools errand.
“the NRA will continue to lead the fight in the legislative, legal and political arenas to secure national right to carry reciprocity so that all Americans can defend themselves everywhere they are legally entitled to be”.
Sorry the NRA refuses to address the really egregious laws already on the books that essentially disarm or put the American people at serious disadvantage to the armed government. How about a move to repeal the idiotic 1986 law?
I’d think more along the lines of profession licenses..BAR, plumber, electrician, hair stylist.
If one is good in NY, why not FL or CA or...
Though, as a (L), I fail to see why one needs a license from govt (why not a 3rd party to certify?) to be employable; especially in regards to the like of stylists/etc.
Even a ‘certified’ plumber can fail to plumb to code (not that many seek/get ‘permits’ [yet ANOTHER peeve of mine]); let alone the inspector is on the up-an-up and could care two whits.
“Which means the national reciprocity idea is a fools errand.”
I think is a worthwhile goal, but I don’t expect that the recent Court rulings will be much help in achieving it. We had a recent case on firearms law that the Supreme Court just declined to hear without comment. So, that is just the easy way out for them to dodge the issue.
We should just leave no stone unturned, but knowing that we have to spend the always-limited money and energy wisely to keep moving the ball down the field.
Funny how lots of homosexuals seem to worship their 2nd amendment Created Things, among others.
How’s that work in the context of Romans 1:25...?
No, very little cross over with those two groups.....but you're so anxious to try and get in a little scripture, wrongly, that you can't resist.
Exactly. Reciprocity may now be mandated, but that will only be determined by a court case. And given the penalties involved you really need to think hard about whether you really want to be the test case.
The NRA doesn’t complete a thought that I think it starts towards with it’s comments on Roberts dissent. Namely that the homosexual marriage case pretty much kills the “it’s not an individual right” argument dead. Or, rather, the credibility of the Left to use the argument.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.