Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SCOTUS strikes down New York CCW Scheme (DOOMERS DEEPLY SADDENED)
SCOTUS ^ | 06/23/2022 | SCOTUS

Posted on 06/23/2022 7:31:41 AM PDT by TexasGurl24

Thomas writes opinion.


TOPICS: Breaking News
KEYWORDS: 2ndamendment; armedcitizen; banglist; clarencethomas; newyork; nra; rkba; scotus; secondamendment; supremes; thomas; trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-168 next last
To: Vermont Lt

Every state is now a shall issue state.


101 posted on 06/23/2022 9:31:12 AM PDT by Poser (Cogito ergo Spam - I think, therefore I ham)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: TexasGurl24

Nothing in the Second Amendment’s text draws a home/public distinction with respect to the right to keep and bear arms.


102 posted on 06/23/2022 9:33:40 AM PDT by MarvinStinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Pack Knight

This also impacts other places who try to do the two-part permitting as well, such as Massachusetts and Rhode Island.


103 posted on 06/23/2022 9:33:42 AM PDT by matt04 ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: TexasGurl24

I am curious why Thomas, as senior justice in the majority, chose to write the majority opinion in this gun decision but apparently handed off Dobbs to Alito. Any insight or speculation?


104 posted on 06/23/2022 9:35:59 AM PDT by Hebrews 11:6 ("This is Thy pleasure, that Thou art my joy")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joe fonebone

States can still require a permit, However, they can No longer make it a two-part permit where part one is you pass a background check and then part two is they decide if they issue one, even if you passed said background check, based on your stated reason for applying. As an example, Place is like New York city, Boston Massachusetts, etc. Would strictly enforce the two part requirement and make you write down a reason why you wanted it. Even if you put self-defense, they would deny it unless you could specify a specific threat and even then they still could deny it.

However, if you were some special celebrity, extremely wealthy person who could afford a lawyer, etc. They will gladly issue you one no matter white.


105 posted on 06/23/2022 9:37:39 AM PDT by matt04 ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ducttape45

From what I read, the “two part “permitting system was deemed unconstitutional. They still may require a permit, however, it essentially removes the “May issue“ system. If you apply, pass the background check they have to issue it, they can no longer require you to give a reason to justify your application.


106 posted on 06/23/2022 9:41:45 AM PDT by matt04 ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Hebrews 11:6

The Justices typically write about the same number of opinions per sitting. Thomas has written 7 now, and is probably done for the term.

Alito is just as capable of writing the abortion decision, and he’d be the next most senior Conservative.


107 posted on 06/23/2022 9:43:54 AM PDT by TexasGurl24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: gitmo

New York State, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and I’m sure others require both a background check in for you to state a reason why you Want the permit. For example, in New York City, you can pass the background check but can be arbitrarily denied because they don’t believe self-defense is a good enough reason to issue it.

The way I understand it, it takes away the “May issue” permits and forces them to issue you a permit as long as you can pass a background check.


108 posted on 06/23/2022 9:45:28 AM PDT by matt04 ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: gitmo

The two-part test is the made up standard that has treated the 2nd Amendment like a second class right in the lower courts.

The first step is a threshold inquiry about whether the Second Amend­ment even applies. The second step is a balancing sliding scale analysis, which has let Obama appointed judges ignore the 2nd Amendment. After today, no more.


109 posted on 06/23/2022 9:45:59 AM PDT by TexasGurl24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: TexasGurl24

110 posted on 06/23/2022 9:48:54 AM PDT by GraceG ("If I post an AWESOME MEME, STEAL IT! JUST RE-POST IT IN TWO PLACES PLEASE")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RandallFlagg

That is correct. But Her Heinous Hochul will impose her will and try to formulate a new strategery. Problem is, the 6-3 ruling is explicit and now THE LAW OF THE LAND.


111 posted on 06/23/2022 9:49:39 AM PDT by Shady (The #JihadJunta: "We are now a nation of Men, Not of Laws. You are not as equal as we are...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Shady

Illinois did the same thing. They still became shall issue.


112 posted on 06/23/2022 9:50:52 AM PDT by RandallFlagg ("Okay. As long as the paperwork is clean, you boys can do what you like out there." -Fifi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Because it is a made up right. In the Miranda decision, the court called it a court created federal rule of criminal procedure. Over the years the court evolved the “rule” to be broader and broader, ultimately a “constitutional right” even though the right to be warned is not in the constitution and neither is the right to free attorneys. If proposed as a constructional amendment it would never have passed, even today.


113 posted on 06/23/2022 9:53:11 AM PDT by Captain Jack Aubrey (There's not a moment to lose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TexasGurl24

Thanks. I expect Thomas has eagerly awaited Roe’s demise, but that doesn’t necessitate being its actual executioner.


114 posted on 06/23/2022 9:54:35 AM PDT by Hebrews 11:6 ("This is Thy pleasure, that Thou art my joy")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: TexasGurl24

In NY this decision will be given the Brown vs Bd of Ed treatment, that is “all deliberate speed” meaning almost never.


115 posted on 06/23/2022 9:55:41 AM PDT by muir_redwoods (Freedom isn't free, liberty isn't liberal and you'll never find anything Right on the Left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VanShuyten

Clarence Thomas turns the tables and calls gun control racist.

The man is a rare American treasure. pic.twitter.com/ytRWuDxO9S— John Cardillo (@johncardillo) June 23, 2022


116 posted on 06/23/2022 9:57:27 AM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: TexasGurl24

I sometimes enjoy going to DU and savoring their tears over court decisions. Today, they posted a real threat against the life of Justice Thomas:

https://democraticunderground.com/100216832665.

Title:
“I guess the protesters outside houses of Justices will be able to carry guns now
Judge Thomas what do you think about that?”

I hope I’m not violating a FR rule, but I felt this had to be reported.


117 posted on 06/23/2022 9:57:44 AM PDT by bwest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods

That’s not as easy as people think that it is.

New York will be forced to follow the law, just like DC was.

They might kick and scream, but DC had shall issue imposed on them, and even non-residents can get the permits, whether DC likes it or not.


118 posted on 06/23/2022 9:58:24 AM PDT by TexasGurl24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: bwest

Report it to the Supreme Court police.


119 posted on 06/23/2022 9:58:49 AM PDT by TexasGurl24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: 11th_VA

It just did. Maryland will have to issue permits now, whether they like it or not.


120 posted on 06/23/2022 10:01:36 AM PDT by TexasGurl24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-168 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson