Breaking on Bloomberg News tweet: US Supreme Court upholds New York State gun control laws

[Bolo Boffin]

https://twitter.com/BloombergNews/status/323791271074340865

I can't find any more details than this. I am looking!

ETA: Found this at Scotusblog.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/04/court-avoids-gun-rights-dispute/

The Supreme Court, following a pattern that is now quite well established, chose again on Monday to remain on the sidelines as the national debate over gun ownership heats up in the political realm. Without comment, the Justices denied review of the latest attempt to test whether the Second Amendment right to have a gun extends beyond the home.

The denial of review in Kachalsky, et al., v. Cacace, et al. (docket 12-845) was the latest in a series of denials of attempts to explore the reach of the Court’s 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, recognizing a Second Amendment right to have a gun for personal self-defense. That decision, though, was limited to a right to have a gun ready to shoot inside one’s own home.

So they upheld it by declining to take the case.

Here's Kachalsky at Scotusblog:

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/kachalsky-v-cacace/

Issue: (1) Whether the Second Amendment secures a right to carry handguns for self-defense outside the home; and (2) whether state officials violate the Second Amendment by denying handgun carry licenses to responsible, law-abiding adults for lack of “proper cause” to bear arms for self-defense.

By not taking up this case, the Supreme Court has affirmed that state officials do not violate the Second Amendment by denying carry licenses for lack of proper cause. Good news for common sense today!

[graham4anything]

1. There is some good news. Great for Bloomberg and the Mayors

and great that Bloomberg nudged Andrew to do this

[Pullo]

2. SCOTUS is waiting for a better case to decide whether the 2nd A applies outside the home

Last edited Mon Apr 15, 2013, 06:08 PM - Edit history (1)

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Illinois' ban on concealed carry on 2nd Amendment grounds.

A federal appeals court on Friday narrowly rejected Illinois' request to reconsider a ruling that found the state's concealed carry weapons ban unconstitutional, leaving lawmakers in the only state that still prohibits concealed carry grappling with how to proceed.

The 5-4 ruling by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals gave state Attorney General Lisa Madigan the option of appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court — a move that could affect gun laws in other states. It also came on the same day that state lawmakers held a hearing on the issue in Chicago — a city that's drawn national attention for its soaring gun violence and homicide rate, including the death of a 15-year-old honor student a mile from President Barack Obama's home.

.....

Richard Pearson, the executive director of the Illinois State Rifle Association, said the ruling makes clear that courts believe the prohibition violates Second Amendment rights. If Madigan opts to appeal and the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear the case it's possible the justices could strike down not only Illinois' ban on concealed carry, but also gun restrictions in other states, such as New York and Maryland.

"If she does (appeal) I would be happy," Pearson said. "There's a very good chance they'll rule in our favor."

Link

About the same time, 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled carrying concealed firearms in public was not protected under the 2nd A.

The Second Amendment's guarantee of a right to bear arms does not extend to the right to carry a concealed weapon in public, a federal appeals court in Denver has ruled.

"We conclude that the carrying of concealed firearms is not protected by the Second Amendment . . ." Justice Carlos Lucero wrote on behalf of a three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Lucero cited case law dating to the 1800s that put restrictions on walking around in public with a gun.

"In light of our nation's extensive practice of restricting citizens' freedom to carry firearms in a concealed manner, we hold that this activity does not fall within the scope of the Second Amendment's protections," he wrote in the ruling issued.

Link

The 7th Circuit's ruling stands apart from most others on this issue, so the SCOTUS likely waiting for that decision to be appealed before hearing a case on the matter.

[defacto7]

4. That's what I was thinking.

Not taking this one means they could accept another one worded differently. Don't count the chickens just yet.

[Hoyt]

3. Might be another case down the road, but for now the SC didn't kiss NRA's rear. Good to see.

[jimmy the one]

6. pyrrhic victory perhaps, hope not

pullo: 7th Circuit's ruling stands apart from most others on this issue, so the SCOTUS likely waiting for that decision to be appealed before hearing a case on the matter.

You say 7th circuit stands apart from most others on this issue, what is the approx tally can you say? that is, you posted 10th circuit to counter 7th so its 1 to 1, what are the other circuits ruling for concealed carry side? I haven't followed this but am interested.

Dunno if you (pullo) post conjecture or substance, but after reading OP only I was about to post that this scotus 'decision' is indeed a surprising guncontrol victory coming from the rightwing roberts court. Since it ordinarily would show uncertainty amongst the rightwing side & caution should be the rule of thumb by the gunnuts (remember nra did not want to pursue the individual rkba heller case fearing kennedy might go militia). Not quite as good as an actual scotus court case about it with a rights denial of carrying outside the home, but a tacit disapproval it seems.
Had scotus decided to pursue the current case I'd've thunk 'more guns more guns' concealed all over the place.
From what pullo posts I wonder if I'm just surprised about a pyrrhic guncontrol victory, short lived.
Again, dunno that much about how scotus works, would scalia or roberts have final say about whether to consider this?
How long does the gun lobby have to challenge this issue again? next week after they file again or is it a year perhaps?

PS: there are several state constitutions RKBA's from the 1800's thru 1970s where states provided constitutional prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons, & allowed for their state legislators to enable prohibitions on carrying concealed. IIRC about half of them, Missouri, North carolina, kansas, colorado, texas even, states where today you wouldn't expect it.
Point being, the 2013 scotus would have to rule these all were 'unconstitutional', yet not too many serious complaints arose back then, as violating the 2nd pretendment.

[Pullo]

7. I'm not aware any other Circuits ruled concealed carry is protected under the 2nd A

Last edited Tue Apr 16, 2013, 07:05 PM - Edit history (1)

Just the 7th.

Honestly, even with the current court make up, I'd be surprised if the SCOTUS ruled ccw is protected under the 2nd. I think it's more likely "may issue" states might see their laws scrutinized. Not on 2nd A grounds, but more to do with equal protection.