The SCOTUS will be taking on serious Second Amendment issues for the first time in almost a decade:
The court granted a right-to-carry case out of New York that that pits the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association against the City of New York. New York bans transporting permitted handguns outside city lines, even if the gun is not loaded and is locked in a container. The guns currently can only be taken to the handful of shooting ranges within city limits.
Supreme Court Revives Trump’s Ban On Transgender Military Personnel, For Now
The case could have wide ramifications for gun rights and gun restrictions across the country, depending on how broadly the court rules.
Conservative justices have been champing at the bit to take up gun rights cases. Justice Clarence Thomas in 2014, for example, criticized the court for not taking up more gun cases, calling it a “disfavored” right.
“The right to keep and bear arms is apparently this Court’s constitutional orphan,” Thomas wrote.
With a newfound majority after the confirmation of Justice Brett Kavanaugh, conservatives may have their chance to make a broad ruling, holding, for example, that the right to own a gun means the right to carry one, or it could rule more narrowly, saying New York’s law is overly restrictive or something in between.
And if the conservative majority issues a broad opinion – and Real Americans hope they do – the reaction is going to make the Kavanaugh hearings look like a Taylor Swift concert.
Smoke ’em if you got ’em.
The single most important issue is scrutiny. I suspect Thomas knows this and is on board. Whether he can convince the others, is the question.
The Constitution gives the government the power to enact laws, but also protects certain rights from government’s laws. What happens when a law comes into conflict with a right?
You have a property right in some land but the government zones the land as wilderness so you cannot use the land at all. Has the government taken your property right in violation of the Constitution? Can the government restrict an Aztec sun worshipper from slaughtering children, or is that an infringement on religious freedom? Can the government punish you for falsely shouting “fire” in a theatre, or is that an impermissible restriction on freedom of speech?
The Constitution is silent on the issue so the Supreme Court gets to decide whether the law violates the constitution. How strongly should gun rights be protected? That’s the fundamental issue for Second Amendment cases.
My Higgins boat has no ramp. 🙁
(https://www.pinterest.com/pin/133348838936581986 is similar.)
They can change the constitution any time they want. Surely, if the stakes as high as they say that they are, and the truth so obvious, they can convince 3/5 of the states to delete the 2nd amendment? After all, the gun control liberals claim to speak for the people.
Just like with climate change and CO2, the notion that the existence of guns cause crime seems to go without question, and all that remains is how to “control” guns. Yet, we could stop all these mass murders in a heartbeat, so to speak, if we just pass a law against murder. Oh, wait…
Well, at least we could stop these school shootings, if we just pass a law against carrying a gun into a school. Oh, wait… But thank goodness we can stop all armed robberies if we just allow people to post a sign saying “no guns allowed on these premises”? Oh, wait…