United States 2nd Amendment Legal Cases and Law Discussion

[bullethead]

Looks like the Illinois AWB is not going to be enforced for a while:

Article:

BREAKING: Accuracy Firearms v. Pritzker (IL state court): Illinois judge says the state showed "blatant disregard for Constitutional Law" when it passed the "assault weapon" and magazine ban, grants temporary restraining order as to the 866 plaintiffs.

https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/thecentersquare.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/d/a3/da3e9e10-9914-11ed-9a42-3fd24fdd0551/63cb1aeea723b.pdf.pdf

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1616573518661193729

 

[bullethead]

Boy, Illinois just hates the shit out of its citizens:

Article:

The transcript of the IL AWB hearing (state case, DeVore, TRO issues) is out. Wow!!!! The state really hates its people, especially people that own guns. Just 2 examples pictured (doesn’t scratch the surface even).

Emergency Temporary Restraining Order Hearing Transcript

Ilinois (ECWd) – The Transcript from the Emergency Restraining Order hearing on the gun ban can be downloaded at this link or viewed below. I took the liberty of highlighting some very intere…

edgarcountywatchdogs.com

Source: twitter.com/Non_Fudd/status/1616817252065574913

 

[Cherico]

Boy, Illinois just hates the shit out of its citizens:

Article:

The transcript of the IL AWB hearing (state case, DeVore, TRO issues) is out. Wow!!!! The state really hates its people, especially people that own guns. Just 2 examples pictured (doesn’t scratch the surface even).

Emergency Temporary Restraining Order Hearing Transcript

Ilinois (ECWd) – The Transcript from the Emergency Restraining Order hearing on the gun ban can be downloaded at this link or viewed below. I took the liberty of highlighting some very intere…

edgarcountywatchdogs.com

Source: twitter.com/Non_Fudd/status/1616817252065574913

Wow that's screaming for the courts to slap them down based on pure principle

 

[Bacle]

 

[bullethead]

Boy, that just gives the pro-2A lawyers tons of ammo for an emergency injunction.

Making millions of people felons overnight makes for a good anti-Chevron deference case.

 

[Cherico]

Boy, that just gives the pro-2A lawyers tons of ammo for an emergency injunction.

Making millions of people felons overnight makes for a good anti-Chevron deference case.

to be fair the ATF has had decades to get used to a supreme court that would litterally punt anything gun related, dealing with a supreme court that actually supports the second is not something their used to.

 

[prinCZess]

Spoiler

922(r) has been a bullshittery from the beginning, and in a perverse way I'm kind of glad to see it's bullshittery getting roped into the newer bullshittery that braces have become.

Though there's probably a think-piece to be written in a half-century about how detrimental it has been to continually undermine gun-owners respect for laws by the steady increase of how stupid and arbitrary those laws are.

'Laws' in this case meaning 'totally just regulations', of course. Because Congress is cowards with a masochism fetish, courts passed the buck with Chevron deference, and ATF are bureaucrats with a hard-on for expansion of their institutional power in any manner possible.

 

[bullethead]

Here's a hilarious example of being the exact opposite of Illinois:

Article:

BREAKING: Beeler v. Long (E.D. TN): Tennessee agrees that its under-21 handgun carry ban violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments, says it will start processing carry permit applications from 18-20-year-olds and pay plaintiffs $47,250 in legal fees.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.tned.99561/gov.uscourts.tned.99561.41.1.pdf

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1617617606579736577

And also a case of a state showing the same spirit of spite as Illinois:

Article:

A new Massachusetts bill would enact a 36% tax on guns and ammo:

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1617631166299013121

 

[Emperor Tippy]

The Massachusetts one is more than just a 36% tax. It is 36% of the wholesale value of the firearm.

So when a dealer sells a gun that the dealer paid a thousand dollars for they owe the state $360, plus sales tax, plus income tax on any profit from the sale.

That amount will get tacked onto the purchase price, which will also increase the sales tax because that is paid on the price the customer pays for the final product and is paid before any other calculations are made.

 

[bintananth]

The Massachusetts one is more than just a 36% tax. It is 36% of the wholesale value of the firearm.

So when a dealer sells a gun that the dealer paid a thousand dollars for they owe the state $360, plus sales tax, plus income tax on any profit from the sale.

That amount will get tacked onto the purchase price, which will also increase the sales tax because that is paid on the price the customer pays for the final product and is paid before any other calculations are made.

That tax is solely intended to drive the Massachusetts gun dealers out of business. It's high enough for buyers to consider it worthwile to do their shopping in a firearms-friendly neighbouring state.

 

[LordsFire]

That tax is solely intended to drive the Massachusetts gun dealers out of business. It's high enough for buyers to consider it worthwile to do their shopping in a firearms-friendly neighbouring state.

Especially a tiny-ass state like Massachusetts.

 

[bullethead]

This is an interesting turn of events:

Article:

BREAKING: Fifth Circuit strikes down federal domestic violence restraining order gun ban (922(g)(8)), saying that the government failed to demonstrate that it "fits within our Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation."

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicyfoundation/pages/3970/attachments/original/1675361904/United_States_v_Rahimi_Opinion.pdf

Article:

Article:

Judge Ho concurs: "...our Founders firmly believed in the fundamental role of government in protecting citizens against violence, as well as the individual right to keep and bear arms—and that these two principles are not inconsistent but entirely compatible with one another."

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1621214961610407936

Article:

"Of course, the Bruen Court did not rule on the constitutionality of 43 specific state licensing regimes because that was not the issue before the Court. Rather, the Court merely blessed the general concept of shall-issue regimes."

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1621245265138130950

Article:

"The Government's reading of Heller and Bruen also turns the typical way of conceptualizing constitutional rights on its head."

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1621245269076484102

Article:

"Perhaps most importantly, the Government's proffered interpretation lacks any true limiting principle... Could speeders be stripped of their right to keep and bear arms? Political nonconformists? People who do not recycle or drive an electric vehicle?"

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1621245272260071426

Article:

"The Government next points to laws in several colonies and states that disarmed classes of people considered to be dangerous, specifically including those unwilling to take an oath of allegiance, slaves, and Native Americans."

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1621245276026454017

Article:

"Thus, these 'going armed' laws are not viable historical analogues for § 922(g)(8)."

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1621245279218327556

Article:

"Where the surety laws imposed a conditional, partial restriction on the Second Amendment right, § 922(g)(8) works an absolute deprivation of the right, not only publicly to carry, but to possess any firearm, upon entry of a sufficient protective order."

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1621245283349798912

Article:

"..we previously concluded that the societal benefits of § 922(g)(8) outweighed its burden on Rahimi’s Second Amendment rights. But Bruen forecloses any such analysis in favor of a historical analogical inquiry into the scope of the allowable burden on the Second Amendment right"

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1621245287254659072

So basically, federal gun bans that rely on domestic violence restraining orders are dead.

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1621214956111777793

 

[Bacle]

Ban on marijuana users owning guns is unconstitutional, U.S. judge rules

A federal law prohibiting marijuana users from possessing firearms is unconstitutional, a federal judge in Oklahoma has concluded, citing last year's U.S. Supreme Court ruling that significantly expanded gun rights.

www.reuters.com

 

[Sergeant Foley]

God Bless the 2nd Amendment!

 

[bullethead]

Saint Benitez is sick and tired of California's bullshit:

Article:

NEW: Miller, Duncan, Rhode, Fouts v. Bonta (S.D. CA): Judge Benitez asks California "to file a brief which identifies the best historical regulation that is a proper analogue and relevantly similar" to the challenged laws in the four Second Amendment cases assigned to him.

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1623039146427093029

 

[Typhonis]

Never piss off the bench.

 

[Bacle]

Ban on guns with serial numbers removed is unconstitutional -U.S. judge

A federal judge in West Virginia has ruled that a federal ban on possessing a gun with its serial number removed is unconstitutional, the first such ruling since the U.S. Supreme Court dramatically expanded in June.

www.reuters.com

A West Virginia judge just used Bruen to rule simply having a gun with no serial numbers on it is not a crime, and is protected under the Constitution, so the ban on those sort of firearms is illegal.

 

[prinCZess]

So in summary of the last few months (in some courts), we've got serial number filing getting struck, bar on possession of a firearm while also being a marijuana user being struck, the domestic violence bar on possession being struck, the classification of bumpstocks as machineguns struck, Illinois new assault weapon banning put on hold due to likelihood of being struck, New York's new restrictions on carry locations held due to likelihood of being struck, and whatever comes out of California and the amalgamated-monstrosity case...

Bruen and the historical analog basis are looking like substantial watersheds. Really seems like a lot of these states (and the federal government) could've maintained a lot more of these restrictions if gun-control proponents had been satisfied with existing controls and whatever skate-by things they could come up with to screw people in other ways using objective measures, but trying to hang-up things on subjective standards and arguments is going to bite them in the ass.
...
I wish I could say I feel sorry for them, but it's basically all schadenfreude at this point.

 

[Cherico]

So in summary of the last few months (in some courts), we've got serial number filing getting struck, bar on possession of a firearm while also being a marijuana user being struck, the domestic violence bar on possession being struck, the classification of bumpstocks as machineguns struck, Illinois new assault weapon banning put on hold due to likelihood of being struck, New York's new restrictions on carry locations held due to likelihood of being struck, and whatever comes out of California and the amalgamated-monstrosity case...

Bruen and the historical analog basis are looking like substantial watersheds. Really seems like a lot of these states (and the federal government) could've maintained a lot more of these restrictions if gun-control proponents had been satisfied with existing controls and whatever skate-by things they could come up with to screw people in other ways using objective measures, but trying to hang-up things on subjective standards and arguments is going to bite them in the ass.
...
I wish I could say I feel sorry for them, but it's basically all schadenfreude at this point.

they spent not years, not decades but generations acting like total asshats, if they have a problem they can move to canada.

 

[bullethead]

California taking some big Ls in its dumb handgun roster lawsuit:

Article:

NEW: Boland v. Bonta (C.D. CA): President of PORAC, the largest law enforcement organization in California, files declaration in opposition to the state's handgun roster, saying it "unjustifiably privilege law enforcement over the average citizen". https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.858747/gov.uscourts.cacd.858747.57.2.pdf

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1629297229826539520

Article:

"The UHA arbitrarily deems as 'unsafe' the handguns that thousands of police officers in the state use to protect society and to protect themselves on a daily basis... But these weapons are not truly unsafe, and are merely deemed unsafe for political reasons."

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1629298425475858432

Article:

"There is no principled reason why all law-abiding citizens in California... should not be able to buy, at a gun store, the same type of handguns that are commonly issued to approximately 77,000 peace officers while they are on-duty in California."

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1629298427208122371

Article:

"The guns issued or authorized by law enforcement agencies in California are not unsafe... These handguns do not become unsafe at the end of an officer's shift or career, nor are they unsafe in the hands of a law-abiding citizen."

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1629298428877365248

Article:

"We found out about the existence of this case too late to file an amicus brief with this Court in time for its ruling on the preliminary injunction. We intend to request leave to file such a brief prior to trial or summary judgment in this matter."

Source: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1629298430945181696