The New York Rifle and Pistol Clubs v. Bruen [New York State] decision was "monumental" for gun rights and gave them a lot of key victories in the last few months, Alan Gottlieb, the executive director of the Second Amendment Foundation, told ABC News in an interview.
"We've knocked out some laws in California, we've got restraining orders against some of the ones in New York, we just got the temporary restraining order against the one in New Jersey," Gottlieb said.
The shock to the system is that the United States Supreme Court - which has neither force nor funds, only judgment - has ordered 6-3 New York to stop using a law it has taken as fundamental. Known as the Taylor Law, New York has required anyone who seeks permission to carry a gun to show a need - occupational or personal.
But now six members of the Supreme Court of the United States have embraced the declaration of Senior Justice Clarence Thomas that
Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.”
At the heart of the decision is this a repudiation of the sort of weighing and balancing:
Despite the popularity of this two-step approach, it is one step too many. Step one of the predominant framework is broadly consistent with Heller, which demands a test rooted in the Second Amendment’s text, as informed by history. But Heller and McDonald do not support applying meansend scrutiny in the Second Amendment context. Instead, the government must affirmatively prove that its firearms regulation is part of the historical tradition that delimits the outer bounds of the right to keep and bear arms.
No comments:
Post a Comment