I was hoping that at least the Court would smack the law down as unconstitutional thereby preventing other cities and states from copying New York. I won't make a prediction regardless.
How is confirming a right expanding it?
I note the zombie justice showed up. Obviously the hopeful speculation here that she was suffering from sepsis was incorrect, or we’d already be rid of this wicked tyrant
I’m not a “ constitutional expert “ but I think your 2nd Amendment right would trump any state gun control law. Period.
The supremes are by definition deep state entities. They are filtered through multiple layers of statist conformity before they’re even proposed for the job. Don’t expect anything to significantly restrict government power from them.
Gee, those words can be a little confusing, let me get back to you.......
Roberts sucks. We need to replace Ruth Disaster Ginsberg with a new Trump appointed conservative so Roberts can side with the liberals all day long in futility.
If I understand this correctly, they DID dismiss this as “moot” since NY rescinded the law (knowing the USSC would throw it out). I think the USSC didn’t have the chance to smack down the law before NY acted.
when did common sense die???
New York City and New York State changed their laws AFTER SCOTUS granted cert. So at the time the court took the damned case, the old law was in effect.
I've been reading the transcript of the oral arguments (here:https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2019/18-280_m64o.pdf) and the liberals on the court all were focused on why the case sholdn't be mooted, and the conservatives focused on the restrictions to travel that still apply, such as not being able to make any deviations from a direct trip from home to the range with your unloaded and locked firearm.
My bet is that Roberts sides with the liberals and declares that the changes to the law has rendered the case moot.
Doesn’t it say in the second paragraph above that NY repealed the law?
I could be wrong.
They only took this case because of the egregious nature of the restrictions and that they could make a narrow ruling that had no effect anywhere else.
We will not get a court to uphold the 2nd broadly until President Trump appoints two more justices.
We currently have three conservatives on the court.
This just in -
The Supreme Court heard a challenge Monday to New York City rules that imposed onerous restrictions on gun transportation.
After the Supreme Court decided to hear the case, New York relaxed the challenged guidelines and asked the justices to dismiss the case as “moot,” arguing the new regulations gave the plaintiffs everything they were seeking.
The justices spent the majority of Monday’s argument exploring whether or not they should dismiss the case and gave comparatively little attention to whether the old rules pass Second Amendment muster.
Per: https://dailycaller.com/2019/12/02/supreme-court-nyc-gun-argument/
I'm skeptical that the court will accept the mootness argument, though the (not so)'wise latina' will likely dissent strongly. Sadly, this case is being brought on extremely narrow grounds.