Supreme Court remits MD assault weapons ban back to lower courts in light of Bruen vs. NY ruling

[Inigoes]

Has it been discussed, what happens with victory? Do regulated long guns return and get processed on 77r again? Or cash and carry like rest of America?

The 77r law is still on the books.

 

[Boxcab]

I remember my first short-barreled musket. I had to submit a parchment with my fingerprints and a portrait.

Did you self draw thr portrait or did they require that you use an artist anointed by the King?


.

Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk

 

[teratos]

Did you self draw thr portrait or did they require that you use an artist anointed by the King?

Artist anointed by the king. Obnoxious.

 

[dblas]

You really think Clarence Thomas is going to retire with Biden on the bench?

That would be the biggest switcharoo ever pulled. Thomas decides on Bruen and then months later retires from the SCOTUS knowing it would switch back to Liberal control and the Bruen decision would be overturned.

Bruen decision can't be overturn just because the make up of SCOTUS Changed, that is simple middle school civics. There needs to be a similar case brought before them to be able to change their jurisprudence, and currently there is no such case anywhere close to making it to SCOTUS to change it.

 

[dblas]

Has it been discussed, what happens with victory? Do regulated long guns return and get processed on 77r again? Or cash and carry like rest of America?

Back to the laws of Sept 30, 2013, they become regulated, require 77R and 7 day wait.

 

[scottyfz6]

Bruen decision can't be overturn just because the make up of SCOTUS Changed, that is simple middle school civics. There needs to be a similar case brought before them to be able to change their jurisprudence, and currently there is no such case anywhere close to making it to SCOTUS to change it.

But I would be a lot of money that the libs states would be passing every bill/law they could to try to get one they could appeal all the way to Scotus to get it over turned.

 

[trickg]

But I would be a lot of money that the libs states would be passing every bill/law they could to try to get one they could appeal all the way to Scotus to get it over turned.

The burden of proof to show that Bruen is somehow in error is a long uphill battle. This isn't to say that it can't happen - there were two big pieces of legislation that IMO should have never happened, and we're still suffering the consequences of those, (NFA 1934 and GCA 1968) but Bruen is written very very well - it's going to be difficult to have anyone say that it was done in haste or in error.

 

[Biggfoot44]

Back to the laws of Sept 30, 2013, they become regulated, require 77R and 7 day wait.

This is ripe for eventual challenge under Bruen , but alas not specifically addressed in Bainchi .

 

[Allen65]

The burden of proof to show that Bruen is somehow in error is a long uphill battle. This isn't to say that it can't happen - there were two big pieces of legislation that IMO should have never happened, and we're still suffering the consequences of those, (NFA 1934 and GCA 1968) but Bruen is written very very well - it's going to be difficult to have anyone say that it was done in haste or in error.

The chance the current court would overturn is effectively zero. But the Antis don't need to get a clean overturn to make gun owners' lives miserable. Spamming us with bill after bill, each of which needs to be challenged separately, effectively moots the right until each is individually overturned in an intentionally drawn-out lower court process while PIs keep getting stayed. The only real fix is for the GOP to nominate an electable presidential candidate in 2024 so that balance on lower courts can be improved. Those District and Appellate courts are where the real work of establishing 2A jurisprudence is done.

An apparent majority of working judges in 2CA, 3CA, 9CA, and possibly 4CA are deeply, unapologetically intent on retaining the old interest balancing standard of evaluating the constitutionality of 2A legislation. Thacker on the 4CA Bianchi panel, Henderson in DC Circuit, and whoever in 2CA keeps staying injunctions against enforcement of NY's anti-Bruen law are shining examples of judges who will ignore Bruen's requirement that THT be the actual standard of analysis for enumerated rights. As long as they remain the majority of their districts and circuits, Bruen will remain nothing more than words on paper without real-world impact within their jurisdictions, with SCOTUS only being able to play whack-a-mole with a small percentage of the cases.

 

[scottyfz6]

The burden of proof to show that Bruen is somehow in error is a long uphill battle. This isn't to say that it can't happen - there were two big pieces of legislation that IMO should have never happened, and we're still suffering the consequences of those, (NFA 1934 and GCA 1968) but Bruen is written very very well - it's going to be difficult to have anyone say that it was done in haste or in error.

While thats nice to say and think, and it is right. If the court changes to strong lib control it is easy to change the interpretation of the constitution to fit what they want. We know they will change the "settled" law as fast as they could.

It only takes a simple case that is fought all the way to scotus, for scotus to say. Oh we are looking at the second amendment in a new light... It applies to militia only everything else is banned. As much as we want to say it cant be done, we know it can.

 

[Garet Jax]

Bruen decision can't be overturn just because the make up of SCOTUS Changed, that is simple middle school civics. There needs to be a similar case brought before them to be able to change their jurisprudence, and currently there is no such case anywhere close to making it to SCOTUS to change it.

You make that sound like a high burden. To me changing the makeup of SCOTUS is that same as changing the law. Look how quickly Roe v Wade was overturned. Look at what the CA4 did with the elimination of G&S in MD years ago. They accepted the case and overturned the lower courts decision in < 3 weeks and less than a couple of days before it was to go into effect.

They can largely do what they want and there aren't many checks and balances in place to stop them.

 

[trickg]

While thats nice to say and think, and it is right. If the court changes to strong lib control it is easy to change the interpretation of the constitution to fit what they want. We know they will change the "settled" law as fast as they could.

It only takes a simple case that is fought all the way to scotus, for scotus to say. Oh we are looking at the second amendment in a new light... It applies to militia only everything else is banned. As much as we want to say it cant be done, we know it can.

That's a stretch - we have almost 235 years of precedent saying otherwise. It has been infringed upon, but we are starting to right the ship, and everyone knows it - even the libs. They don't like it, but there are now 3 key SCOTUS cases - Heller in 2008 being the first - that say so. Bruen further defines and strengthens both Heller and McDonald, correcting purposeful misinterpretations from asshats like Brian Frosh.

SCOTUS can't simply go and ignore that kind of precedent.

 

[JollyPedro]

While thats nice to say and think, and it is right. If the court changes to strong lib control it is easy to change the interpretation of the constitution to fit what they want. We know they will change the "settled" law as fast as they could.

It only takes a simple case that is fought all the way to scotus, for scotus to say. Oh we are looking at the second amendment in a new light... It applies to militia only everything else is banned. As much as we want to say it cant be done, we know it can.

Possible, but highly un probable of this ever happening.

 

[MDFF2008]

You make that sound like a high burden. To me changing the makeup of SCOTUS is that same as changing the law. Look how quickly Roe v Wade was overturned. Look at what the CA4 did with the elimination of G&S in MD years ago. They accepted the case and overturned the lower courts decision in < 3 weeks and less than a couple of days before it was to go into effect.

They can largely do what they want and there aren't many checks and balances in place to stop them.

Yeah, it's no long, uphill battle, esp when the left wants revenge for Roe.

 

[Garet Jax]

That's a stretch - we have almost 235 years of precedent saying otherwise. It has been infringed upon, but we are starting to right the ship, and everyone knows it - even the libs. They don't like it, but there are now 3 key SCOTUS cases - Heller in 2008 being the first - that say so. Bruen further defines and strengthens both Heller and McDonald, correcting purposeful misinterpretations from asshats like Brian Frosh.

SCOTUS can't simply go and ignore that kind of precedent.

Let's just say you're right and they "can't" do it. Let's further say that they do it anyway. Who or what is going to stop them? They are the highest court in the land - they report to no one.

There are a few tenants that the entire system is based on that are starting to be no longer true.

PS - I definitely suffer from BGOS.

 

[KingClown]

That's a stretch - we have almost 235 years of precedent saying otherwise. It has been infringed upon, but we are starting to right the ship, and everyone knows it - even the libs. They don't like it, but there are now 3 key SCOTUS cases - Heller in 2008 being the first - that say so. Bruen further defines and strengthens both Heller and McDonald, correcting purposeful misinterpretations from asshats like Brian Frosh.

SCOTUS can't simply go and ignore that kind of precedent.

Have you looked around. Libs give no fucks about precedent THT or anything else. Only mah feelins. A lib court would over turn at light speed

 

[jcutonilli]

Just like it was back in 1791.

The plaintiffs did not challenge the 77r nor did they challenge the mag restriction. The court is not going to rule on an issue that was not challenged.

 

[CruncherBlock]

What you expect and what you get are two different things.

3% chance we will have an opinion in 2 weeks.

What else is required to give a ruling?

 

[rickyp]

Our biggest fight is on the lower court level. They do not care what the Bren said. They are going to continue to rule against gun rights and let it go to the 4th circuit. They will kick it back down and play this game and do everything they can to keep it from going up higher. The reason is because they can, there is nothing to stop them. This is going to continue until one side runs out of money,

 

[smokey]

Our biggest fight is on the lower court level. They do not care what the Bren said. They are going to continue to rule against gun rights and let it go to the 4th circuit. They will kick it back down and play this game and do everything they can to keep it from going up higher. The reason is because they can, there is nothing to stop them. This is going to continue until one side runs out of money,

The biggest fight is the senate and white house. If we lost those two in 2024, we likely lose the courts. We already seem to have lost legislatures, so the courts are the dam holding back Canada level 2a infringements.

We've got to either get mail in voting tossed, or Republicans need to quickly develop a big and complex ground game to ensure all republican ballots possible end up getting counted. They're fighting against the ease of rolling into high density housing and walking out with a couple hundred ballots. That's hard to do out in the burbs and countryside.