Amicus Briefs Filed In The Case Of NYSRPA v. Bruen
BY Herschel Smith
3 years, 5 months ago
There are a lot of them
Ted Cruz and 24 other republican senators.
FPC.
In all there are 43 briefs.
… 43 amicus briefs filed supporting this case. Among these groups, NRA-ILA is heartened to see support from numerous elected officials including 176 Members of the U.S. House of Representatives led by Rep. Claudia Tenney (NY-22), 25 U.S. Senators led by Sen. Ted Cruz (TX), 26 Attorneys General led by Mark Brnovich (AZ) and Eric S. Schmitt (MO), and Governor Greg Abbott (TX).
But the Supreme Court is filled with controllers and cowards. My prediction: they’ve heard the truth now, and they will ignore it, or find some way to whittle down the scope of the decision, or decide that the meat of the claims have no standing in their court because blah blah blah.
On July 22, 2021 at 8:09 am, Longbow said:
The Court has already agreed there is standing by agreeing to hear the case.
What will the “majority” do? We can be almost certain that Mr. Chief Justice Roberts will find a way to side with the leftists on the court. That SHOULD leave a 5-4 split in support of the 2A.
The caveat is, the Court almost always finds a way to support the Government’s position on a given statute. They see this as their mission. It is VERY RARE that the Court finds a statute directly injurious to a fundamental right secured by the Constitution.
What SHOULD the Court do? They SHOULD set the standard of applying “Strict Scrutiny” in any Second Amendment case. They should strike down the NY law by boldly stating that the right to bear arms is fundamental and personal, that any statute which categorically prevents most people from exercising that right is null and void on its face.
My best guess is…
They will probably find the statute injurious the the Second Amendment. However, they will say that “gun control” regimes are perfectly legitimate and allowable as long as the “Right”, which shall not be infringed, is only infringed a little bit. All reasonable people would agree, don’t you know! They will most likely say that as long as the law “allows” people generally to receive the State’s “permission” to carry, the State may inconvenience the People to some degree. The State’s presumed power to grant or deny “permission” will remain intact and infringements will continue at the State’s whim.
On July 22, 2021 at 9:44 am, Frank Clarke said:
I addressed this some time back…
https://dispatchesfromheck.blogspot.com/2010/04/how-to-write-decision-in-mcdonald-v.html