High court rejects challenge to NY gun law

AP ^

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

Uh Oh! A bad sign?

[Sir Napsalot]

Thanks for the clarification.

And Gondring, too. For the additional material.

[xkaydet65]

The plaintiffs made a direct appeal to SCOTUS for a writ of certiorari, but since there have been no cases before any federal, state, or municpal court in NY regarding this law SCOTUS refused to grant the writ. Also, since no plaintiff claimed penalty or loss under the law at this time there was no standing. bBy refusing to grant the writ SCOTUS creates no precedent and provides no bar to future requests.

[Cboldt]

This one went through that process. The Circuits are somewhat split on the issue. The 7th Circuit has found that Illinois ban on carry permitting is unconstitutional, and the 2nd Circuit has found that NY's permitting process is constitutional. There is no right to a carry permit in NY. Carry permits are granted only to select persons, typically the well-connected.

I think SCOTUS is tired of gun cases. It'll let the Circuits impose or uphold limited carry.

[Cboldt]

In NYS, the “Supreme” Courts are the lower court.

[Cboldt]

-- Apparently they have already bought into the idea that 2nd amendment rights CAN be infringed. --

Yep. SCOTUS has enabled the lower courts of all stripe to limit the RKBA. "Long standing" limitations indeed.

[Usagi_yo]

Exactly.

[Drawn7979]

i think the high court is doing the right thing.

[1010RD]

By individual states. So much for the 14th Amendment.

[Logical me]

Nothing new from the communists controller State of NY. California is now trying to ban guns, so I guess the Federal Government will go along with these two communists Democrat States.

[MHGinTN]

The Constitution says ‘shall not be infringed’. How is requiring governmental permission to keep and bear not infringing on the Constitutionally defined right? Simply writing a law to require government permission is harming by infringing. What is really at play is the unSCOTUS preparing to nullify the Constitution by fiat ruling. Which will be amusing since the Heller ruling.

[Kickass Conservative]

The Optimal Moment will be after a few more Kagan’s and Wise Latina’s are Seated and the Old White (and One Old Black) Guy have died off or retired.

[xzins]

What reasons for carrying are acceptable and/or non-acceptable?

Does NY have a list of acceptable reasons? Non-acceptable reasons?

[expat2]

Having political connections is the only acceptable reason.;>)

[xzins]

The Constitution says ‘shall not be infringed’. How is requiring governmental permission to keep and bear not infringing on the Constitutionally defined right?

You're right, and the 2d amendment doesn't even mention Congress, Fed Gov't, state gov't, local government.

well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

This reads: "NO ONE shall infringe." It's taken out of the hands of the "states rights when convenient" crowd.

Furthermore, it specifically says PEOPLE!

The right to keep and bear arms is intentionally designed to apply to the people.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

New York is in the 2nd circuit, which means such appeals have to go through Sotomayor, who can choose to offer it to the court or not. If she would have, it would have taken four justices to agree to hear it for it to be accepted.

Chicago, btw, is justice Stevens.

[DSH]

New York is in the 2nd circuit, which means such appeals have to go through Sotomayor, who can choose to offer it to the court or not. If she would have, it would have taken four justices to agree to hear it for it to be accepted.

That isn't how the cert petition process works at the U.S. Supreme Court. If any four Justices had wanted to hear this case, cert would have been granted.

[DSH]

Chicago, btw, is justice Stevens.

Justice Stevens, btw, retired from the Court nearly two years ago.

[zeugma]

The case is not ripe yet. Someone actually has to be hurt by the law first.

Yes, because depriving the rights of millions of people is just standard policy for 'our' government.

[DSH]

Justice Stevens, btw, retired from the Court nearly two years ago.

My mistake . . . make that nearly three years ago.