New York City. Reuters.
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the first gun rights case since 2010 which challenges New York City's limits on having handguns outside of the home. Reuters. The Justices will review a lower court holding that upheld the restriction on gun rights. In New York people with "premise licences" are only allowed to carry their guns to gun ranges in the city and are not allowed to take their guns to ranges outside of the city or to other homes. This differs from concealed carry licences which are not at issue in this case. The plaintiffs claim that the law is an obvious infringement on their gun rights. The Supreme Court has not taking any gun rights cases since 2010 but it thought that the new makeup of the court, with a solid 5-4 majority, may lead to a victory in this case.
My Comment:
Good news from SCOTUS and overdue as far as I am concerned. As soon as Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed the court should have been taking cases like this right away. The 5-4 conservative majority should mean that they will overturn this case.
It is also very likely by the time the Court hears this case Ruth Bader Ginsburg will no longer be a Justice. Her health is extremely poor and she hasn't been seen in public for a while now. My guess is she will either retire or pass away soon and by the time this case is heard we will have already gone through the replacement hearings and the court will have a 6-3 conservative majority.
Of course you never know how a court is going to rule. I do not entirely trust the conservative justices on the Court. Though Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Thomas and Alito are likely yes votes, I no longer trust John Roberts to do the right thing. Having another conservative justice on the court would be a lot more comforting.
As for the law itself, it seems like an insane restriction on gun ownership. If you have a gun you can only have it in your house or at one of a few approved gun ranges? What happens if you move to another city? What happens if those gun ranges close? And what if you have two houses (rich person problem, but nonetheless)?
It seems very clear that the New York City law is at odds with the US constitution and previous Supreme Court rulings that say individuals have a right to keep and bear arms. But if you are so limited in where you can take your firearm then the right to bear arms essentially doesn't exist. Overturning the law is the right thing to do.
The victory would be rather minor as the New York law doesn't effect many gun owners and there aren't a lot of other gun laws in the country like it. However, it could cause a flood of other gun rights cases that could also result in laws being overturned. It could also turn the tide of state legislators in blue states going totally out of control. If they know their laws will be overturned they may decide it's not worth the effort.
Still, all of this is speculation. It's not a guarantee that the court will overturn the law and a lot can happen between now and when the case is heard in October. It would be a major surprise though if the court ruled the other way. Here is hoping that this is just the first in a long series of terrible laws being overturned.
No comments:
Post a Comment