We’re going to find out soon if Justice Neil Gorsuch is pro-gun or not as SCOTUS has two petitions pending on gun cases:
“… The most important is a petition from gun rights activists asking the court to find for the first time that the Second Amendment right to keep a gun for self-defense extends to carrying firearms outside the home. In cases from California, the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled that it did not. “Any prohibition or restriction a state may choose to impose on concealed carry — including a requirement of ‘good cause,’ however defined — is necessarily allowed by the [Second] Amendment,” it said. A strongly worded dissent said “any fair reading” of the Supreme Court’s 2008 decision finding a constitutional right to gun ownership for self-defense “compels the conclusion that the right to keep and bear arms extends beyond one’s front door.” A second case involves whether those convicted of certain crimes can be barred indefinitely from possessing firearms …”
The California case is Peruta v. California which is backed by the NRA & CRPA. This is the one that could ultimately make New York shall-issue.
I believe the second case is United States v. Games-Perez.
How is it up to only Gorsuch? Scalia, Thomas, et al wanted to take Highland Park and were overruled (after which they furiously dissented). Gorsuch sits in Scalia’s seat but all the rest is the same.
It’s not. I believe at least 4 Justices have to want to take the case.
It is possible the SCOTUS will take Peruta. The 9th is the most overturned Court, something like 83% of the time. And yes, 4 Justices must agree on taking the case.
“The Supreme Court has its own set of rules. According to these rules, four of the nine Justices must vote to accept a case.”
From uscourts dot gov
The point is that with Scalia there, we couldn’t get cert for highland park. We could not get the 4. Gorsuch replaces Scalia so the math is the same. So what am I am not understanding?
It is my understanding that Peruta is the best RTC case to take to SCOTUS.
I don’t want a “best” case to take to SCOTUS, I want the “correct” case to take there, so gun rights are supported and expanded.
Heller and MacDonald were designed carefully to achieve specific steps in expanding SCOTUS precedent on the 2nd Amendment. Let’s not let perfection be the enemy of the good, but at the same time, let’s not get a 5-4 ruling that eviscerates all the accomplishments of the last 40 years, either.
mikee,
Heller and McDonald were the correct cases to bring to SCOTUS. Did not stop the lower federal courts from doing their best in disregarding it entirely.
Best,
Nick