The #SupremeCourt will return to the bench starting at 10 a.m. Friday to release its next round of 2024 decisions, with about a dozen major rulings expected over the next week or so. The justices do not say in advance which opinions will be released
#ClarenceThomas wrote the majority in NYSRPA v. #Bruen & was the sole dissent in today’s decision.
Bruen’s ruled a #NewYork#law was unconstitutional & that carrying a gun in public was a constitutional right guaranteed by #2A.
#SCOTUS said states are allowed to enforce "#ShallIssue" permitting, where #ConcealedCarry applicants must satisfy criteria, like #BackgroundChecks, but "#MayIssue" systems using "arbitrary" evaluations by local authorities are unconstitutional.
“…if the #SecondAmendment right was historically understood to allow an ofcl to disarm anyone he deemed 'dangerous,' it may follow that modern Congresses can do the same...
“…Yet, historical context compels the opposite conclusion. The Second Amendment stems from English resistance against 'dangerous' person laws.”
@timo21 it depends because #Bruen says no-ish, #Rahimi says yes-ish. Basically, IMO, this is good because it didn’t rule that domestic abusers have an unfettered right to #guns, but it doesn’t clear up how to devise, apply or enforce any given federal or state #GunRegulation.
In this decision, #ClarenceThomas uses the #Bruen “historical parallel” standard. He says that the #DangerousPersons categorization in English law granted individuals the right to bear arms for the purpose of protecting themselves AGAINST dangerous persons, but does not grant the government the right to take guns away from dangerous persons & so it doesn’t apply.
What seriously pisses me off about #ClarenceThomas’s dissenting opinion is that he’s basically arguing that we can’t use the #precedent English #law to TAKE AWAY individuals’ #GunRights, but guess what? That’s exactly what they did in #Dobbs. They took away #WomensRights to #ReproductiveHealthcare based on a bunch of bullshit.