Supreme Court
Responses: 9
2
2
0
The use of case law doesn't work that way. SCOTUS will need a case that speaks to the gun permit issue in front of it to decide. Gun laws traditionally have been decided by each state. Not sure if this has been adjudicated before...
(2)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
That's exactly it.
No "standing" no case to fight. In addition to that, SCOTUS picks their own cases unless there is a conflict in Districts which force their hand.
With current cases, all states (if I remember correctly) have some form of concealed carry, but as handgun ownership (as in purchasing) is limited to within a state, states don't have to offer Non-resident concealed carry or reciprocity.
So we run into CA doesn't have to offer a Non CA resident a concealed carry permit. Concealed Carry is not considered a Right. Ownership is, however.
No "standing" no case to fight. In addition to that, SCOTUS picks their own cases unless there is a conflict in Districts which force their hand.
With current cases, all states (if I remember correctly) have some form of concealed carry, but as handgun ownership (as in purchasing) is limited to within a state, states don't have to offer Non-resident concealed carry or reciprocity.
So we run into CA doesn't have to offer a Non CA resident a concealed carry permit. Concealed Carry is not considered a Right. Ownership is, however.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
SCOTUS picks and chooses which cases it hears based on its own internal politics. My understanding is it only takes 4 Justices to decide to HEAR a case, but 5 to Decide one.
As such, SCOTUS had their hand forced in hearing Same Sex Marriage because of conflicting decisions below them. They had to resolve. Prior to that, they were able to refuse to hear, leaving a verdict intact, or kick it back down for additional review.
With Gun Permits, it depends on what kind of Permit you are talking about. DC v Heller & Chicago v Miller confirmed that ownership was independent of militia participation (affirmed 2a protections), however it did not touch class of weapons, CONCEALED hand gun permits, Constitutional Carry etc.
Each of those issues require standing to make its way to them before they can even review the issue. For the most part, lobbyists are fighting lawsuits where they know they can win, knocking down specific laws, using that as precedent to build up bigger and bigger cases and then "may" try to force the issue later.
The last thing they want is a SCOTUS ruling not in their favor when you have local/state rulings that are in your favor.
As such, SCOTUS had their hand forced in hearing Same Sex Marriage because of conflicting decisions below them. They had to resolve. Prior to that, they were able to refuse to hear, leaving a verdict intact, or kick it back down for additional review.
With Gun Permits, it depends on what kind of Permit you are talking about. DC v Heller & Chicago v Miller confirmed that ownership was independent of militia participation (affirmed 2a protections), however it did not touch class of weapons, CONCEALED hand gun permits, Constitutional Carry etc.
Each of those issues require standing to make its way to them before they can even review the issue. For the most part, lobbyists are fighting lawsuits where they know they can win, knocking down specific laws, using that as precedent to build up bigger and bigger cases and then "may" try to force the issue later.
The last thing they want is a SCOTUS ruling not in their favor when you have local/state rulings that are in your favor.
(2)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
LTC Ed Ross Former Gun dealer. Had to deal with many questions regarding Guns from both sides of the fence.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
In my view if gay marriage is a constitution alright requiring all states recognize gay marriages from states that allow gay marriage, the same principle applies to gun rights.
(1)
(0)
Capt Seid Waddell
LTC Ed Ross, Sir, gun rights are in the Constitution, while gay marriage is a state issue IMHO.
(1)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
Capt Seid Waddell Loving v VA (SCOTUS) established that Marriage was a Right. That Right has typically been administered at the State level. Much like firearms ownership is typically administered at the State level.
SCOTUS became involved in Marriage (including Same Sex Marriage) because States (and the Federal government) were not treating all equally.
The Federal Government became involved with things like the GCA & FOPA, however much of the administration is still handled at the state level because it is an Enumerated Protection.
It's not that Marriage isn't a Right or a Protected Right, it's that it isn't Enumerated, so it generally falls under State Powers except when superseded by Equal Protections Clause.
SCOTUS became involved in Marriage (including Same Sex Marriage) because States (and the Federal government) were not treating all equally.
The Federal Government became involved with things like the GCA & FOPA, however much of the administration is still handled at the state level because it is an Enumerated Protection.
It's not that Marriage isn't a Right or a Protected Right, it's that it isn't Enumerated, so it generally falls under State Powers except when superseded by Equal Protections Clause.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google