Posted on 10/17/2022 4:57:57 AM PDT by marktwain
On June 22, 2022, the Supreme Court issued the long-awaited and anticipated decision in the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen case. The decision ended more than a decade of silence by the Court as lower courts eviscerated Second Amendment right restored by the Heller and McDonald decision in 2008 and 2011, respectively.
Bruen decisively restored the right to carry portable arms outside the home and clearly ordered lower courts to abide by the standards of the Heller and McDonald decisions rather than use the “two-step” process the lower courts had established to evade the restoration of Second Amendment protections.
Governor Hochel of New York reacted within hours of the Supreme Court decision in Bruen with an emergency session explicitly designed to void the effect of Bruen.
On October 3, 2022, a federal district judge in New York found most of the “emergency” New York law to be unconstitutional, specifically a portion forbidding the legal carry of firearms in Times Square. From that decision:
Based on the historical analogues located thus far, it does not appear permissible for New York State to restrict concealed carry in the following place: “the area commonly known as Times Square, as such area is determined and identified by the city of New York; provided such area shall be clearly and conspicuously identified with signage” (as stated in subsection “2(t) of the CCIA).
On October 11, 2022, the City of New York defied the Supreme Court and the federal district court by imposing a City law banning the legal carry of guns by ordinary citizens in Times Square, with local law 0602-2022. The local law is to take effect immediately.
There will almost certainly be challenges to the law in short order.
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
This has always been a major problem with the Constitution and regards for SCOTUS opinions.
No teeth in in anything to punish those that defy. Mandatory minimum prison sentences.
There will be no consequences.
Someone may get arrested and sue the city/state, and probably win after years and $$ in legal bills.
Ah that’s a great solution.
Bump!
Let’s go back when BLM and others destroyed Times Square. Not only were there no arrests, people died and the police were defunded almost immediately.
Why don’t they just make a crime-free zone and be done with it?
That’s the spirit! Good job!
I don’t want the fact I get into the long grass a little here to be taken as opposition to any goal of Ammo Land or any FReeper or anything, but just to press for clearer, more accurate reporting:
From what I can see, it’s an overstatement to say NYC “defied” the Supreme Court. For political purposes, sure, we all know Hochul was trying all she could to oppose the gun rights the Constitution gave us, and to minimize the effect of the Supreme Court ruling, rather than live in its spirit and letter.
But “defied” suggested the State took actions directly prohibited by the Court. From what I understand, the state was testing whether special safety concerns could allow the state to restrict gun rights in certain places under certain circumstances. The federal court seems to be correct in defeating this test, I would argue partly precisely because the state has demonstrated it cannot be trusted to act reasonably in respecting guns rights
Nov 6th...NYC Marathon
That's what I thought.
I’ll stick w defying NYC...
The Supreme e Court is successful in defeating it beczuse one does not create laws based on some evil that some “might do” with product that is perfectly legal to own.
While it is true that guns are used for violent purposes, that fact is irrelevant to the second amendment which addresses the people’s ina,ienable right to self defence and to bear arms.
Everything Kathy is doing is in defiance of that inalienable right to self defence and right to bear arms. Everything she has tried is in defiance of that right. That is what the left do- they keep relentlessly defying our rights until th3 right just give up and give in
She came rogue out and said that she ‘has a duty to protect citizens agaisnt guns and gun violence’ and has taken over the role of the constitutional right by declaring that guns are not allowed in certain places, and by declaring that folks must jump through hoops in order to obtain the ‘rights as granted by the state in defiance of the constitution and sc. The Supreme Court laid it out to her, and stil. She tries to defy the 2nd a
Yep Stay away Let it crush under the weight of its Cloward-Piven
We are witnessing that, with its absolutely insane economic and social policies
All you ‘thin blue line’ folks should pay special attention to how enthusiastically the enforcers of the police state in NYC enforce this blatantly unconstitutional law. IIRC, this kind of chicanery was actually discussed in the decision itself.
Places like NYC and Cali will always ignore a SC decision if they don’t like it because they know that if there is a challenge to their law, it will take years to get heard in front of the SC.
And when years later the SC strikes down their new law, they will just create another ridiculous law 10 minutes later that again will take years to resolve through the courts.
In the mean time they will enforce their Unconstitutional law no matter what harm it does to civil liberties ... there are NO consequences for them in doing this.
I tried to make it plain as I could that Hochul was trying to subvert the law and the federal court’s response was necessary and correct.
There is no way to win. SCOTUS is defeated so long as there is no change in power.
This is not like the Catholic church. Used to be that if a priest did something awful he could be excommunicated.
Unless the Executive branch uses its police powers to enforce a judicial decision there is no control/correction.
The commie trash are in charge and so long as there is no one in a policing organization willing to disobey orders and unhold their oath, nothing can happen.
Another “cause celebre” for the Dims to complain about the loss of integrity of the courts - when the courts don’t go their way.
Suppose the Supreme Court issues an injunction forbidding ANY prosecution for violating gun laws in New York along with a Writ of Habeas Corpus freeing anyone charged with such a crime by ordering the immediate reversal of any conviction.
Would every New York state judge fail to recognize their authority to do so? Or just some of them?
I wouldn't underestimate the power of the Supreme Court to make New York regret defiance.
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.