Joined
·
1,763 Posts
I've read the decision and here are some of the highlights of that decision:
It strikes down NY's Sullivan Law requiring a license to buy and carry a pistol/handgun in NY and other similar "may issue" licenses in other States. The problem the court had with these laws is the requirement for the applicant to show some special need for a permit and the subjective nature of the review and issuance of such a permit. As such, all States will now be either "shall issue" States or "Constitutional Carry" States.
More importantly for everyone, the SCOTUS in its decision affirmed or further clarified that:
- Average citizens are part of "the people" whom the 2nd Amendment protects (no more this applies only to the militia nonsense.)
- Individual self-defense is the central component of the 2nd Amendment right. (No it's not for hunting or target shooting only. Hear that Joey B.)
- Handguns are firearms in common use and used for self-protection and as such are protected under the 2nd Amendment.
- The 2nd Amendment protects carrying of handguns publicly for self-defense outside the home.
- The 2nd Amendment is not a second-class right subject to a different body of rules.
- NY's "must show proper cause" requirement violates the 14th Amendment.
The decision also stated, "The exercise of other Constitutional Rights does not require individuals to demonstrate to Government Officers some special need."
Of importance to those all across the country is this decision's instruction to lower courts on how to judge 2nd Amendment cases in the future. The decision states that Courts of Appeal who use BOTH a historical AND a means-end two step approach are using one step too many. The SCOTUS instructs the lower courts to use a historical approach only as judges lack the experience in the field to make costs and benefit judgements.
Quoted from the decision, "We reiterate, that the standard for applying the 2nd Amendment is as follows: When the 2nd Amendment's plain text covers an individual's conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct."
also,
"The Government must justify its regulations by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation." The Government bears the burden of proof.
and
"The second amendment guaranteed to all Americans the right to bear commonly used arms in public subject to certain reasonable well-defined restrictions."
A good deal of the decision also references historical laws and practices at the time of ratification and prior. So, the opinions and understanding of the founders who drafted and ratified the Constitution with the Bill of Rights do matter.
The opinion does allow for State licensing on a shall-issue basis. So, it did not strike down State licensing laws. I was hoping it would make all States constitutional carry states. It doesn't.
It strikes down NY's Sullivan Law requiring a license to buy and carry a pistol/handgun in NY and other similar "may issue" licenses in other States. The problem the court had with these laws is the requirement for the applicant to show some special need for a permit and the subjective nature of the review and issuance of such a permit. As such, all States will now be either "shall issue" States or "Constitutional Carry" States.
More importantly for everyone, the SCOTUS in its decision affirmed or further clarified that:
- Average citizens are part of "the people" whom the 2nd Amendment protects (no more this applies only to the militia nonsense.)
- Individual self-defense is the central component of the 2nd Amendment right. (No it's not for hunting or target shooting only. Hear that Joey B.)
- Handguns are firearms in common use and used for self-protection and as such are protected under the 2nd Amendment.
- The 2nd Amendment protects carrying of handguns publicly for self-defense outside the home.
- The 2nd Amendment is not a second-class right subject to a different body of rules.
- NY's "must show proper cause" requirement violates the 14th Amendment.
The decision also stated, "The exercise of other Constitutional Rights does not require individuals to demonstrate to Government Officers some special need."
Of importance to those all across the country is this decision's instruction to lower courts on how to judge 2nd Amendment cases in the future. The decision states that Courts of Appeal who use BOTH a historical AND a means-end two step approach are using one step too many. The SCOTUS instructs the lower courts to use a historical approach only as judges lack the experience in the field to make costs and benefit judgements.
Quoted from the decision, "We reiterate, that the standard for applying the 2nd Amendment is as follows: When the 2nd Amendment's plain text covers an individual's conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct."
also,
"The Government must justify its regulations by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation." The Government bears the burden of proof.
and
"The second amendment guaranteed to all Americans the right to bear commonly used arms in public subject to certain reasonable well-defined restrictions."
A good deal of the decision also references historical laws and practices at the time of ratification and prior. So, the opinions and understanding of the founders who drafted and ratified the Constitution with the Bill of Rights do matter.
The opinion does allow for State licensing on a shall-issue basis. So, it did not strike down State licensing laws. I was hoping it would make all States constitutional carry states. It doesn't.
