NYSRPA v. Bruen, NY 2A Case Supreme Court case and decision

[livingston]

From the comments section from article posted above
Mark N. November 4, 2021 At 13:43
If the Supreme Court concludes that a “may issue” regime is unconstitutional, which the Sullivan Act is, then the Law will fall, although it may take a lawsuit to get NYC to comply. I would anticipate that NYC will pull the same sort of shenanigans that Chicago did when the Seventh Circuit told Illinois that it either had to adopt a shall issue system or the court would simply enjoin the current no carry law, resulting in Constitutional Carry. But eventually the dust settled, and it is not as big an issue as Chicago made it out to be. However, Chicago did enact an ordinance that made public transportation (buses, The El, and subways) sensitive areas. I believe that the trains that serve the outlying suburbs are Amtrack, and therefore no carry as well. So commuters are barred from carrying firearms to and from work. Presumably the same would happen in

 

[Uzi]

It's really sad to see how weak in the knees so many are about this. The overly optimistic views leading to hypothetical scenarios where if, "they take this, I'm okay with that", is not helping. Personally, I will not except a small sliver sized "gracious gift" of my own stolen life and liberty, only in return to get bent over and fucked in the ass by more illegal restrictions, bans, and other laws. There was no "except maybe..." written after "shall not be infringed". Treating your constitutional rights like pawns; a big mistake. They love it when you play their game though, it enables more gun control. Yeah, this mentality is part of the problem.

How come so many haven't gotten outraged by the fact that NYS recently just basically banned making your own firearms pretty much? Well, in another year at least someone in your family might be able to "legally" touch a handgun for the first time after they put out an application for a permit, so they can buy 50 rounds of 9mm. Woweeeee!

For anything you could even conceivably acknowledge as a restoration of the 2A at least in NYS or NYC, you have 100 other unconstitutional laws added to the books to counter it.

 

[spat]

Having not read it, I'm guessing she's saying she will do her best to ignore Constitutional law and SCOTUS rulings as her predecessor did?

They will continue to do so until they can be held personally liable.


IMHO, if they sign or enforce a law that is later ruled unconstitutional, they should lose any immunity they have and a class action suit against them should be imminent.

On top of that, since violating the civil rights of their constituents is decidedly *not* part of their job, they should not be defended by any public resources in that suit.

That doesn't mean the office is off the hook for *it's* liability in allowing them to violate those rights

 

[spat]

From the comments section from article posted above
Mark N. November 4, 2021 At 13:43
If the Supreme Court concludes that a “may issue” regime is unconstitutional, which the Sullivan Act is, then the Law will fall, although it may take a lawsuit to get NYC to comply. I would anticipate that NYC will pull the same sort of shenanigans that Chicago did when the Seventh Circuit told Illinois that it either had to adopt a shall issue system or the court would simply enjoin the current no carry law, resulting in Constitutional Carry. But eventually the dust settled, and it is not as big an issue as Chicago made it out to be. However, Chicago did enact an ordinance that made public transportation (buses, The El, and subways) sensitive areas. I believe that the trains that serve the outlying suburbs are Amtrack, and therefore no carry as well. So commuters are barred from carrying firearms to and from work. Presumably the same would happen in

Would the federal transport law override the train prohibitions ?

You are legal at the beginning and end of the journey for instance.

You couldn't CC on the train, but you could transport in a locked container and then arm up at the destination.

 

[Xae289]

Having just listened to the arguments instead of reading the transcript, I'm encouraged for some kind of a limited win. Breyer, Kagan, and Sotomayor will definitely be the dissent. Coney-Barrett seems the iffy one. I fully expect Roberts to sign with a pro-2A opinion. I doubt we'll get strict scrutiny out of it to make it a massive win, unfortunately, but I can see it doing away with may-issue.

 

[Saltwater60]

Having just listened to the arguments instead of reading the transcript, I'm encouraged for some kind of a limited win. Breyer, Kagan, and Sotomayor will definitely be the dissent. Coney-Barrett seems the iffy one. I fully expect Roberts to sign with a pro-2A opinion. I doubt we'll get strict scrutiny out of it to make it a massive win, unfortunately, but I can see it doing away with may-issue.

I was impressed that they brought up gang members and criminals are already doing this so why can’t law abiding citizens. It’s about time some one in power said this other than Trump

 

[maverick52]

If NY goes shall issue…what happens with reciprocity?

 

[BuffNiag]

If NY goes shall issue…what happens with reciprocity?

NY will never honor permits from other states as a matter of spite.

 

[livingston]

If NY goes shall issue…what happens with reciprocity?

For over a century .... Folks from upstate NY could not enter NY City with a firearm ... No way in hell will they allow a Deplorable Trump supporter from Texas into this state with his handgun... A terrorist for certain to boot.....

 

[Blimey]

I am more concerned when they brought up “ sensitive areas “ in the argument and used a public street corner ( Times Square) or public transportation like the subway in the hearing .
I see them doing what they attempted to do in Chicago like 1000 ft of a school, church, hospital being declared “ sensitive areas as well as restaurants that serve alcohol( even if you aren’t drinking ) etc.

Yep. If the subway is sensitive it will preclude many from carrying. Make everything sensitive with huge radii. Increase the penalty for those carrying in these areas. Change the law to add its strength to no-carry signs and get out a campaign to encourage private businesses to put no-Carey signs up.

Sensitive areas are a very easy topic: any area currently sensitive like a court house or building in which not even a pen knife is legal and/or they have security with metal detectors just apply the same to guns. Since the subway doesn’t have these rules a person carrying should not have extra rules.

This will be a good ruling and should be celebrated but I would what the multi-year backlog will become for NYC residents.

 

[Blimey]

There is also a bill pending for new training and firearms proficiency with a two year required renewal.

Why not make it every six months? Or every weekend? It really looks like so many of these laws have zero bearing in any grounded analysis.

 

[livingston]

Why not make it every six months? Or every weekend? It really looks like so many of these laws have zero bearing in any grounded analysis.

The anti's want firearm ownership to be as difficult as possible.

 

[pshift]

Statement from Governor Kathy Hochul on U.S. Supreme Court Review of New York's Gun Safety Law​

Her statement has NOTHING to do with the lawful possession of firearms! More poli-tricks to deprive us of our rights!

 

[Phazer]

 

[Phazer]

 

[nortatoga]

For the Oral Transcript PDF, if anyone is interested.

Arguments Transcripts

www.supremecourt.gov

 

[BerettaGuy]

From the comments section from article posted above
Mark N. November 4, 2021 At 13:43
If the Supreme Court concludes that a “may issue” regime is unconstitutional, which the Sullivan Act is, then the Law will fall, although it may take a lawsuit to get NYC to comply. I would anticipate that NYC will pull the same sort of shenanigans that Chicago did when the Seventh Circuit told Illinois that it either had to adopt a shall issue system or the court would simply enjoin the current no carry law, resulting in Constitutional Carry. But eventually the dust settled, and it is not as big an issue as Chicago made it out to be. However, Chicago did enact an ordinance that made public transportation (buses, The El, and subways) sensitive areas. I believe that the trains that serve the outlying suburbs are Amtrack, and therefore no carry as well. So commuters are barred from carrying firearms to and from work. Presumably the same would happen in

When I get the time I will find the comment by the solicitor general saying that NY "is" a Shall Issue for a premises permit. and though I agree that that is what Article 400 says, it is not practiced by the capricious and arbitrary method in the counties.

If anyone here has experience with a "premises" permit. PLEASE LET ME KNOW. How long did it take. IF it is Shall Issue why do you need references etc.

It is now in the record of the Supreme Court. It has been said that when it comes to lawyers, He who lies the best wins.

 

[Celt]

How do you guys think this will effect NYC. As in, will it force NYC to recognize a NYS permit, or will upstate residents have to apply for an NYC permit?

 

[Phazer]

How do you guys think this will effect NYC. As in, will it force NYC to recognize a NYS permit, or will upstate residents have to apply for an NYC permit?

Whatever requires the most hassle and will most limit free exercise of the 2A in NYC will be the strategy.

 

[Cooolone]

The after effects and what enforcement capability the SCOTUS has is and has been shown to be... Lacking!

States have already ignored pervious directive and guidance by the SCOTUS! See California and Mass in particular!!! And dollars to donuts NYS is already herding the think tankers to be creative on what, where, how to implement new arduous impediments to it's residents owning and or carrying firearms, period! They won't take it laying down, and they don't give a shit about Federal Law or the SCOTUS. The recent unlawful legislation to restrict personal creation of a firearm is just one example. And the other was the obfuscation and ridiculous change in direction prior to the SCOTUS reversing NYC... It's all a hunch of gobbly goop!

Considering the fact, that there are FACTS which are exhibited by all those other States that operate in a manner in contrast with NY, and DO NOT suffer or experience what those who want restrictive rights application prescribe as fact should be enough to overturn it all... We shall see

 

[Celt]

Whatever requires the most hassle and will most limit free exercise of the 2A in NYC will be the strategy.

I'm sure they are going to implement new requirements such as training with possible live fire, insurance, and possibly make "no guns allowed" carry the force of law. I expect people will still have to apply for nyc permits, although I'm not sure how it works for non New York City residents, and I know they are all so expensive with renewals every two years.

I would expect New York City of all places will likely ignore the Supreme Court ruling until some people bring forth lawsuits and force them into compliance.

 

[BerettaGuy]

I'm sure they are going to implement new requirements such as training with possible live fire, insurance, and possibly make "no guns allowed" carry the force of law. I expect people will still have to apply for nyc permits, although I'm not sure how it works for non New York City residents, and I know they are all so expensive with renewals every two years.

I would expect New York City of all places will likely ignore the Supreme Court ruling until some people bring forth lawsuits and force them into compliance.

Yup and they didn't have much to say about the lower courts flipping the bird to the Supreme Court either.

 

[Xae289]

I'm sure they are going to implement new requirements such as training with possible live fire, insurance, and possibly make "no guns allowed" carry the force of law. I expect people will still have to apply for nyc permits, although I'm not sure how it works for non New York City residents, and I know they are all so expensive with renewals every two years.

I would expect New York City of all places will likely ignore the Supreme Court ruling until some people bring forth lawsuits and force them into compliance.

Well, there's nothing in this talking about reciprocity or issuing to non-residents. My hunch is that NYC would issue licenses to their residents on a shall issue basis, but would continue not to recognize non-NYC resident licenses. So NYC residents would be able to get licenses, but residents of other areas still would neither be allowed to carry in NYC with their licenses, nor would they be allowed to apply for an NYC license unless they own a business there or are employed there in some armed capacity.

As far as restricting where you can carry, I'm sure there would be a massive expansion of places where one is not allowed to carry. NYers with full carry are able to carry pretty much unimpeded these days because no one even thinks about posting no weapons signs in blue areas. If this decision goes our way, once it hits their radars, I'm willing to bet many, if not most, businesses would post no guns signs and most public places like MTA stations, buses, etc., would be off limits. In practice, an NYC resident would likely only be able to carry without being massively inconvenienced while doing things like walking their dogs, going to a friend's house, or going for a jog.

By the way, everyone getting their hopes up based on the oral arguments seeming to go very well, don't. You (probably) and I (definitely) don't know how the Supreme Court works. Maybe they do some horse-trading behind the scenes. Maybe the liberal justices tell the pro-NYSRPA justices they'll tip the scales for other cases and do some negotiating. A little bit of, "listen, if you two decide against the complainant in NYSRPA v Bruen, we'll take your side on cases X, Y, and Z". I'm not saying that will happen, but just a warning not to start counting your chickens yet.

 

[spat]

When I get the time I will find the comment by the solicitor general saying that NY "is" a Shall Issue for a premises permit. and though I agree that that is what Article 400 says, it is not practiced by the capricious and arbitrary method in the counties.

If anyone here has experience with a "premises" permit. PLEASE LET ME KNOW. How long did it take. IF it is Shall Issue why do you need references etc.

It is now in the record of the Supreme Court. It has been said that when it comes to lawyers, He who lies the best wins.

If they try to keep the references requirement someone needs to apply right after moving when it would be impossible for them to get acceptable references.

Then sue over the denial.

 

[Jchrisls]

If they try to keep the references requirement someone needs to apply right after moving when it would be impossible for them to get acceptable references.

Then sue over the denial.

This had a near direct impact on me moving from 1 county to another. Had to wait it out.

 

[Uninformed and Compliant]

If they try to keep the references requirement someone needs to apply right after moving when it would be impossible for them to get acceptable references.

Then sue over the denial.

No need to move. Just live on the county line; everyone I know is not allowed to vouch.

 

[Celt]

If they try to keep the references requirement someone needs to apply right after moving when it would be impossible for them to get acceptable references.

Then sue over the denial.

That scenario is why it took me 7 years to get my permit... about 6 of those years was "getting to know" enough people to be comfortable enough to ask them to be a reference.

 

[djj]

When I get the time I will find the comment by the solicitor general saying that NY "is" a Shall Issue for a premises permit. and though I agree that that is what Article 400 says, it is not practiced by the capricious and arbitrary method in the counties.

If anyone here has experience with a "premises" permit. PLEASE LET ME KNOW. How long did it take. IF it is Shall Issue why do you need references etc.

It is now in the record of the Supreme Court. It has been said that when it comes to lawyers, He who lies the best wins.

In NYC, it's currently taking 18 - 24 months to get a "Premises" license. And yes, the NYPD still requires references AND an in person interview, in addition to having anyone who lives with you sign and notarize an "Affadavit of Co-Habitant" form, which says that they understand and have no objection to the licensee having/storing firearms in the home. So it's yet another example of having to get someone else's permission to exercise a Constitutional Right.

 

[nortatoga]

In NYC, it's currently taking 18 - 24 months to get a "Premises" license. And yes, the NYPD still requires references AND an in person interview, in addition to having anyone who lives with you sign and notarize an "Affadavit of Co-Habitant" form, which says that they understand and have no objection to the licensee having/storing firearms in the home. So it's yet another example of having to get someone else's permission to exercise a Constitutional Right.

Am I right that the license is still a NYS license only issued by the City?

 

[nortatoga]

I believe I found the answer to my question above ^^^^^^

Firearms

www.ny.gov