Posted on 06/30/2022 6:49:48 PM PDT by mlo
The Supreme Court said Thursday that gun cases involving restrictions in Hawaii, California, New Jersey and Maryland deserve a new look following its major decision in a gun case last week.
In light of last week's ruling — which said that Americans have a right to carry a gun outside the home — lower courts should take another look at several cases that had been awaiting action by the high court, the court said. Those cases include ones about high-capacity magazines, an assault weapons ban and a state law that limits who can carry a gun outside the home.
Supreme Court says several gun cases deserve a new look
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Licensed carry permits should be recognized in every state.
As should constitutional carry. Then everyone can declare they came from a CC state.
Several? I'd say that there are hundreds...if not thousands...nationwide.
Alabama has pass constitutional carry which becomes law on Jan 1, 2023.
Thanks for posting that. Kinda wish I knew what all these cases are about. Looks like there are many that are being remanded or granted cert based on the NY Rifle case. Excellent!
Yes. See link above for the order list.
20-1507 ASSN. OF NJ RIFLE, ET AL. V. BRUCK, ATT'Y GEN. OF NJ, ET AL. The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit for further consideration in light of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U. S. ___ (2022).
20-1507 ASSN. OF NJ RIFLE, ET AL. V. BRUCK, ATT'Y GEN. OF NJ, ET AL. The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit for further consideration in light of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U. S. ___ (2022).
21-1194 DUNCAN, VIRGINIA, ET AL. V. BONTA, ATT'Y GEN. OF CA The petitions for writs of certiorari are granted. The judgments are vacated, and the cases are remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for further consideration in light of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U. S. ___ (2022).
21-902 BIANCHI, DOMINIC, ET AL. V. FROSH, ATT'Y GEN. OF MD, ET AL. The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit for further consideration in light of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U. S. ___ (2022).
You'd have to search the SC site to find more information about the individual cases.
You can go here to search for information about a specific case. I think just searching for the case number will work.
Thanks for the link to the dockets.
See my post above #26. They are vacated, and remanded for consideration in light of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen,
You’re right, I just didn’t notice that when I scanned through.
That would still mean nothing has changed. These were all challenges to an existing law, and the judgements all upheld the law. Vacating them doesn’t make the law go away. Only a new decision will do that.
I believe one is about large capacity magazines. One is about an assault rifle ban. And at least one is about an issue similar to NY’s law requiring good case for a permit.
Because states pass those laws. Some of them may eventually fail because of the court's ruling on the 2nd amendment.
But don't think that the 2nd amendment says no state can pass any law that mentions guns. That's not what it says. There are plenty of laws about speech, even though we have free speech. The 2nd amendment means the government can't take away your right to weapons to defend yourself. The court has said that means weapons in common use. Not any possible weapon. And laws about safe storage and such are just normal excercises of state police power.
Amen to that!
None better than Trump.
Yes and no. I suspect some of the appellate courts may well try their best to tie themselves into a pretzel to try to uphold their rulings, in light of the NY Rifle decision, but that would ultimately just send it back to the SC. It will be interesting to watch what happens. The supreme court doesn't often reverse on remand without a hearing of some kind. The SC is attempting to act as if this is all business as usual, and not really just a politics on the part of many of the lower courts. Eventually, they will have to give that up.
When I say nothing has changed I’m referring to right now. What they choose to do in the future is a different thing.
No, the orders from SCOTUS specifically say the judgments are vacated and the cases remanded back to the Circuit cort for further proceedings consistent with the Bruen decision.
Pretty much. They'll fight it until the bitter end. Unlike Republicans, because they have no shame whatsoever. The law, truth, and justice mean nothing at all to them.
“:^)
When the Supreme Court sends back a case for reconsideration in light of a case decided by the Supreme Court, it is a very clear, but polite way of telling the Circuit Court to reverse their previous decision. Make no mistake, it is an implied order to do. If the Circuit Court refuses to do so, the Supreme Court will publicly slap then down.
But keep your hands where we can see them ...
“They aren’t vacated. These are cases that had been submitted to the Supreme Court and were waiting to be accepted or not. The Court sent them back down to the Circuit courts to be reconsidered, taking into account the new ruling in Bruen. The Circuit court decisions are still in force.”
The Supreme Court’s orders expressly “vacate” the lower court ruling and remand the case.
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.