United States 2nd Amendment Legal Cases and Law Discussion

[The Immortal Watch Dog]

 

[bullethead]

The post-action analysis:

 

[The One Char]

Can I get a TL;DW?

 

[ShadowArxxy]

Can I get a TL;DW?

TL;DW:

The previous SCOTUS decisions upholding Second Amendment rights have all been about the ownership of firearms. NYSRPA v. Bruen is the first case regarding the carry of firearms in public places to reach SCOTUS. Previous precedent on this subject is all at lower court levels and fairly inconsistent from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, although there is a broad trend that federal courts have mostly ruled that state laws restricting the carry of firearms in public is subject to an intermediate scrutiny Constitutional standard.

SCOTUS hasn't handed down a ruling yet, but the way they took the case on oral questioning strongly suggests that they're going to make a pro-gun ruling. Probably not a sweeping one that throws out all state limits on firearms carry, but possibly moving it up to strict scrutiny and/or laying out a more explicit framework for intermediate scrutiny.

Edit: The New York gun law in question is exceptionally (and unreasonably) strict, so it's *very* likely that SCOTUS will overturn it; the big question his how broadly will they rule?

 

[Captain X]

Biden Admin Amassing Millions of Records on U.S. Gun Owners Amid New Crackdown on Firearms

The Biden administration in just the past year alone stockpiled the records of more than 54 million U.S. gun owners and is poised to drastically alter gun regulations to ensure that information on Americans who own firearms ultimately ends up in the federal government's hands, according to...

freebeacon.com

 

[bullethead]

Good news! The judge in a case trying to sue Armslist over the fact that someone used the platform to sell a gun to someone who shot somebody tossed the case out:

BREAKING: Webber v. Armslist (E.D. WI): Judge throws out @bradybuzz lawsuit to hold Armslist liable for a shooting, says it's part of "a nationwide effort to use litigation as a way of circumventing the legislative process in the area of gun control."

 

[bullethead]

Oh boy, get ready for some potential fireworks:

twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1473096778681569286

BREAKING: Duncan v. Bonta (9th Circuit): Ninth Circuit lets Californians retain their pre-ban and "Freedom Week" magazines for now, stays decision upholding the state's ban for 150 days and says it will be extended if a cert petition is filed with the Supreme Court.

 

[Abhorsen]

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2022/01/20/20-56220.pdf

So a win in the ninth circuit that won't last long because it will be en banc'd.

One of the justices clowns the rest of the Ninth Circuit court's 2nd amendment Jurisprudence by writing the en banc overturning for them, with sarcastic asides. Starts on page 48.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2022/01/20/20-56220.pdf

So a win in the ninth circuit that won't last long because it will be en banc'd.

One of the justices clowns the rest of the Ninth Circuit court's 2nd amendment Jurisprudence by writing the en banc overturning for them, with sarcastic asides. Starts on page 48.

En banc review is almost always requested, but quite rarely granted (it takes a majority of the active sitting judges on a circuit to agree to an en banc review).

 

[bullethead]

One of the justices clowns the rest of the Ninth Circuit court's 2nd amendment Jurisprudence by writing the en banc overturning for them, with sarcastic asides. Starts on page 48.

I'm honestly amazed they allowed that to get published, because it's such a huge burn on the 9th Circuit.

 

[Abhorsen]

En banc review is almost always requested, but quite rarely granted (it takes a majority of the active sitting judges on a circuit to agree to an en banc review).

This is the ninth, which routinely does it when gun control cases don't go the government's way. The judge literally complains about this in his first paragraph:

I agree wholeheartedly with the majority opinion, which is not terribly surprising since I wrote it. But I write separately to make two additional points. The first is simply to predict what happens next. I’m not a prophet, but since this panel just enforced the Second Amendment, and this is the Ninth Circuit, this ruling will almost certainly face an en banc challenge. This prediction follows from the fact that this is always what happens when a three-judge panel upholds the Second Amendment in this circuit. See, e.g., [six cases listed]. Our circuit has ruled on dozens of Second Amendment cases, and without fail has ultimately blessed every gun regulation challenged, so we shouldn’t expect anything less here. See Duncan, 19 F.4th at 1165 (VanDyke, J., dissenting).

 

[killerofa23]

I know it’s going to be absolutely comedic when enblanc happens

 

[Battlegrinder]

2 We refer to strict scrutiny as a theoretical matter—a thought-experiment, really. Our court has never ultimately applied strict scrutiny to any real-life gun regulation.
....
5 “Severe” is a very strong word, and a real
workhorse when italicized.
.....
6 Another one of our favorite tricks. Once you
frame Heller as speaking only to complete and total bans, it’s easy to side-step its holding. All a judge has to do is pretend the Supreme Court would have allowed anything short of DC’s drastic prohibition in Heller, instead of viewing Heller as easily correcting an especially egregious constitutional violation.
....
10 We’ve really gotten a lot of mileage out of this concept. One might think that because the “first
prong” (government’s important interest) will always be met in Second Amendment cases (because guns are inherently dangerous), that the “reasonable fit” part of the test would take on special significance. But thankfully the opposite is true. We’ve been able to water down the “fit” part of the test for Second Amendment cases to such an extent that many of our judges have been forced distance our Second Amendment case law from the First Amendment case law from which it was supposedly borrowed. See Duncan, 19 F.4th at 1116 (Graber, J., concurring) (“To be sure, the First Amendment and the Second Amendment differ in many important respects (including text and purpose), and the analogy is imperfect at best.”).
.....
11 I know this sounds a lot like rational basis
review. After all, if a government interest would be
“achieved [more] effectively absent the [challenged] regulation,” it’s hard to see how that regulation would survive even rational basis scrutiny. But trust us, this is heightened scrutiny. So very heightened.

Wow.

 

[Abhorsen]

Wow.

Yeah, that's why I linked it. The sheer sarcasm in his opinion is just breathtaking. Highly recommend a full read. The opinion starts on page 46, and his mock 'opinion' begins on 48.

 

[stephen the barbarian]

his last one is a gut-buster

Again, it doesn’t matter much what we say here.
Once we’re allowed to effectively balance competing
interests under our Second Amendment intermediate
scrutiny, it’s so easy justifying a regulation that we
could easily just delegate this part of the opinion to our
interns

 

[The Immortal Watch Dog]

What in the flippity flop is this fucking bullshit...

 

[ShadowArxxy]

They were straight up making and selling illegal full-auto conversion parts.

 

[The Immortal Watch Dog]

Most ATF agents are criminals with badges, its far more logical to assume they're perpetrating a frame job than anything else.

 

[bullethead]

I'd have to wait to see what Fudd Busters says about this, as he is an actual gun lawyer.

In related news, I had zero fucking idea the AA-12 was embroiled in a criminal case against the guys who made it for doing lots of ass-backwards things that violated the NFA:



Apparently, the ATF destroyed all but one AA-12 in the country, and the one surviving copy is the only semi-auto receiver Sol Invictus Arms has made, due to the criminal case.

 

[Urabrask Revealed]

that violated the NFA

Fuck the NFA, and a pox on the ATF.