After Supreme Court gun decision, what’s next?

6/24/2022 7:23:00 AM

After Supreme Court gun decision, what’s next?

After Supreme Court gun decision, what’s next?

The Supreme Court issued its biggest gun rights ruling in more than a decade

. In those decisions the justices established a nationwide right to keep a gun for self-defense in a person's home. The question for the court this time was just about carrying a gun outside the home.Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the court's majority opinion that the right extended outside the home as well: “Nothing in the Second Amendment’s text draws a home/public distinction with respect to the right to keep and bear arms.”

HOW DID THE JUSTICES RULE?The gun ruling split the court 6-3, with the court's conservative justices in the majority and its liberals in dissent. In addition to Thomas, the majority opinion was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. The court's three liberals who dissented are justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

Read more:
WOKV News »

Wall Street ends down sharply, hit by Apple and China worries

U.S. stocks ended sharply lower on Monday after protests in major Chinese cities against strict COVID-19 policies sparked concerns about economic growth, while Apple Inc slid on worries about a hit to iPhone production. Read more >>

Supreme Court says North Carolina Republicans can defend photo ID law in courtThe Supreme Court that leaders of North Carolina’s Republican legislature can step in to advocate for a voter ID law in court that they believe the state’s Democratic attorney general isn’t fighting hard enough to defend.

Supreme Court gun decision could topple gun laws in liberal statesNow that the Supreme Court has struck down New York’s concealed carry law, similar restrictions in several other states may soon face successful challenges. DOX US, EH? SCOTUS does not represent the majority of the USA. It's been stacked and is full of religious zealots who are trying to take this country back 100 years. SCOTUS has no respect. Hahahaha yes. Let everyone carry. The criminals and tyrants will be scared

Supreme Court To Rule On IRS Penalty For Non-Willful Failure To Report Foreign AccountsThe U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether the IRS was right in calculating FBAR penalties at $2.72 million (instead of $50,000) when the parties agree that the violations were not willful. The Circuit Courts are split on the issue. Hmmm!

Biden reacts to Supreme Court gun decision: 'Deeply disappointed'President Biden is 'deeply disappointed' with a Supreme Court gun decision that struck down a New York law restricting access to concealed carry permits Thursday.

Man pleads not guilty to attempting to kill Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh26-year-old pleads not guilty to attempting to kill Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Has ABC News been charged yet? Which one is it abc?

Calls to Expand Supreme Court Grow After Justices Strike Down New York Gun LawDemocratic lawmakers are reviving calls to expand the Supreme Court after the court’s far right justices ruled on Thursday to strike down a New York law that requires people to have a “proper cause” to obtain a license to carry a gun in public.

2010 .voter ID law in court that they believe the state’s Democratic attorney general isn’t fighting hard enough to defend.Justices ruled 6-3 in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v.in United States v.

In those decisions the justices established a nationwide right to keep a gun for self-defense in a person's home. The question for the court this time was just about carrying a gun outside the home. In 2018, North Carolina voters approved an amendment to the state constitution requiring a photo ID to vote in person at the polls. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the court's majority opinion that the right extended outside the home as well: “Nothing in the Second Amendment’s text draws a home/public distinction with respect to the right to keep and bear arms. SUPREME COURT RULES NEW YORK'S STRICT CONCEALED CARRY GUN LAW IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL “This is more than just a great day for New York because this ruling opens the door to rightly change the law in the seven remaining states that still don’t recognize the right to carry a firearm for personal protection,” said Jason Ouimet, executive director at the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action.” HOW DID THE JUSTICES RULE? The gun ruling split the court 6-3, with the court's conservative justices in the majority and its liberals in dissent. Roy Cooper, a Democrat, but the legislature then overrode his veto and enacted the measure. In addition to Thomas, the majority opinion was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. Boyd .

The court's three liberals who dissented are justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Classified as “non-strict” by the National Conference of State Legislatures, it would allow voters who show up at the polls without an ID to cast a provisional ballot, which would be counted if they later presented a qualifying ID to the county board of elections. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who sided with the majority, wrote in a concurring opinion that the latest decision would not affect “shall issue” permitting rules in 43 states, which allow applicants to receive concealed carry permits as long as all the basic legal requirements are met. ARE NEW YORKERS NOW FREE TO CARRY A GUN IN PUBLIC? Not exactly. The justices didn't touch other parts of New York's gun law, so other requirements to get a license remain. Nonetheless, the NAACP challenged the law in court, arguing that it intentionally discriminated against Black and Latino voters and unduly burdened the right to vote. The court made it clear that the state can continue to make people apply for a license to carry a handgun, and can put limitations on who qualifies for a permit and where a weapon can be carried. “Going forward, therefore, the 43 States that employ objective shall-issue licensing regimes for carrying handguns for self-defense may continue to do so,” he added. In the future, however, New Yorkers will no longer be required to give a specific reason why they want to be able to carry a gun in public. The law remains blocked, however, because of orders issued by state courts in separate litigation. On top of these tax penalties, there are bigger and uglier penalties for failing to file bank account reporting forms known as FBARs.

The decision also doesn't take effect immediately and state lawmakers said Thursday that they were planning to overhaul the licensing rules this summer. They have yet to detail their plans. The state’s Democratic attorney general, Josh Stein, defended the photo ID law in both federal courts, but Republican legislators said his efforts were half-hearted, more concerned with administrative issues than countering the discrimination claims. Democratic Gov. Some options under discussion include requiring firearms training and a clean criminal record. The state might also prohibit handguns from being carried in certain places, like near schools or on public transit. That prompted the speaker of the state's General Assembly and president pro tem of the state Senate to ask the U. In addition, the decision does not address in response to the Buffalo grocery store massacre that among things, banned anyone under age 21 from buying or possessing a semi-automatic rifle. This is a dangerous decision from a court hell bent on pushing a radical ideological agenda and infringing on the rights of states to protect our citizens from being gunned down in our streets, schools, and churches. Make no mistake, the penalties for failing to file an FBAR are far worse than tax penalties.

WHAT OTHER STATES ARE LIKELY TO BE IMPACTED? A handful of states have laws similar to New York's. Supreme Court to let them intervene in the case, arguing that state law explicitly gave them the authority to defend the laws that they passed. The Biden administration has counted California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island as all having laws similar to New York’s. Connecticut and Delaware are also sometimes mentioned as states with similar laws. Defenders of the state photo ID requirement will need to prevail in both state and federal court, however, in order for the law to be enforced. Maryland’s attorney general said Thursday that his office would review the Supreme Court decision to determine how the state’s laws could be affected. WHAT CAN STATES DO TO REGULATE GUNS AFTER THE DECISION? Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, noted the limits of the decision. States can still require people to get a license to carry a gun, Kavanaugh wrote, and condition that license on “fingerprinting, a background check, a mental health records check, and training in firearms handling and in laws regarding the use of force, among other possible requirements.. You have 10 accounts? That’s $600,000—even if you were non- willful.

” Gun control groups said states could revisit and perhaps increase those requirements. They have been proven to reduce gun violence,” Attorney General Brian Frosh said in a statement. States can also say those with a license to carry a gun must not do so openly but must conceal their weapon. Justice Samuel Alito noted that the decision said “nothing about who may lawfully possess a firearm or the requirements that must be met to buy a gun.” States have long prohibited felons and the mentally ill from possessing weapons, for example. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER New York Gov. The decision also said nothing “about the kinds of weapons that people may possess,” Alito noted, so states might also try to limit the availability of specific weapons.

The justices also suggested that states can prohibit the carrying of guns altogether in certain “sensitive places.” A previous Supreme Court decision mentioned schools and government buildings as being places where guns could be off limits.. Thomas said that the historical record shows legislative assemblies, polling places and courthouses could also be sensitive places. Thomas said courts can “use analogies to those historical regulations of ‘sensitive places’ to determine that modern regulations prohibiting the carry of firearms in new and analogous sensitive places are constitutionally permissible.” HOW DO COURTS ASSESS GUN RESTRICTIONS GOING FORWARD? The court made it harder to justify gun restrictions, although it's hard to know what the new test the court announced will mean for any specific regulation.

Thomas wrote that the nation’s appeals courts have been applying an incorrect standard for assessing whether such laws are impermissible. Courts have generally taken a two-step approach, first looking at the constitutional text and history to see whether a regulation comes under the Second Amendment and then, if it does, looking at the government’s justification for the restriction. “Despite the popularity of this two-step approach, it is one step too many,” Thomas wrote. From now on, Thomas wrote, courts can uphold regulations only if the government can prove that they fall within traditionally accepted limits. Among state and local restrictions already being challenged in federal court are bans on the sale of certain semi-automatic weapons, called assault rifles by opponents, and large-capacity ammunition magazines, as well as minimum age requirements to buy semi-automatic firearms.

WHAT OTHER BIG RULINGS ARE IN THE WORKS? The Supreme Court heard .