Orders list here. I see Assn of NJ Rifle & Pistol v. Bruck (magazine size), Young v. Hawaii (permit to carry), Bianchi v. Frosh (AW ban), and Duncan v. Bonta (magazine size).

This is common when the Supreme Court decides a case in a way that changes the legal standards while other cases are on appeal. Grant the petition, vacate the Circuit court ruling, and remand to them to do it over according to the new standards. Then see if anyone wants to take a second petition from that. Of course, the Circuit may then remand to the trial…
Continue Reading Supreme Court vacates and remands remaining 2A cases

New York proposes to ban even licensed carry in any business that does not post a sign allowing it, plus requiring 15 hours of live-fire training on a range, and banning carry on ‘sensitive place’ including parks and public transit. Word is that the legislature is meeting today to vote on this.

California proposes to require three character witnesses and to expand “sensitive areas” where guns cannot be possessed, to include “medical facilities, public transit, public parks, playgrounds, public demonstrations and any place where alcohol is sold.” It’s a safe bet that the three references requirement will be expanded to…
Continue Reading Antigun legislatures react to NYSRPA

Jones v. Hendrix. Petitioner was convicted of being a felon in possession 22 years ago, and took and lost a habeas petition to challenge that. Under legislation limiting habeas relief, he could only take a second petition for specified grounds, including a change in constitutional interpretation.

He brought a second habeas petition, after the Supreme Court ruled in 2019 that, in a felon in possession case, the government must prove that the defendant knew he possessed a gun, and also knew that he’d been convicted of a crime punishable by more than a year’s imprisonment. So is there some…
Continue Reading Another pending case

Whitaker v. DC, that would indirectly pose the remaining issue, permit requirements of “good character” or its equivalent (here, whether he was “suitable” to be issued a permit). Indirectly, since petitioner had a DC carry permit, and it was revoked, then reinstated (posing a big question of mootness).

I suppose all the pending petitions on 2A issues will be GVRed, granted, vacated and remanded–in other words, since NYSRPA altered the playing field, let the circuits reconsider their opinions, apply the new standards, and if anyone has a complaint, file another petition for cert.

UPDATE: Yep, I’d expect the magazine-size…
Continue Reading Another 2A case awaiting cert vote

In the Wall Street Journal.

The firm didn’t mind representing and getting a fishy plea deal for Jeffrey Epstein, but found NY State Rifle and Pistol Association beneath their standards.
Continue Reading Paul Clement hits back at Kirkland & Ellis

The permit regimes of the repressive states (6-8 of them) keyed on two ambiguous requirements for a permit (1) “good cause” or a variant of that, and (2) “good moral character,” or a variant of that. NYSRPA knocked out (1). They will likely fall back on (2), arguing that “good moral character” means more than just passes a background check. Create as many new requirements as possible (furnish references, police interviews of references, reject for any possible reason, and certain delay, delay, delay).

It’d be wise to have good folks apply promptly for permits, and start setting up a challenge,…
Continue Reading Future plans

FPC is announcing that California’s Attorney General has advised that carry permits should be issued without the “good cause” requirement.
Continue Reading NYSRPA aftermath: California caves

He and Erin Murphy are founding their own firm. They had been with Kirkland & Ellis, a very big national firm, but K&E voted that it will “no longer represent clients with respect to matters involving the interpretation of the Second Amendment.” Some big clients, we may guess, sniffed at their 2A clientele.

I guess the firm has to keep up its standards.
Continue Reading Paul Clement wins SCOTUS case, leaves law firm

Opinion here.

6-3, Thomas the author, text history and tradition the test. Looks like I called that one on the nose!
Continue Reading NYSRPA decided!

The Supreme Court always releases the most controversial opinions of each Term at its very end (usually the end of June, sometimes going a bit into July). The joke was that they want to release them then so they can get out of town before the mob forms. This year that’s no joke.

The Court has 13 opinions left to give. It’s been modifying its calendar (as usually happens) to add more argument release days. A few days ago, opinion releases were set for tomorrow, Thursday, and this coming Monday. As of this morning, the schedule is for opinion releases…
Continue Reading Counting down to NYSRPA

Here’s the draft. Most of it concerns things like funding for mental health. One section expands “prohibited persons’ to include persons adjudicated of certain juvenile offenses.

Another section fiddles with the definition of “engaged in the business,” which defines who must get an FFL, and who is liable to prosecution if they don’t have one. The current definition dates from the 1986 Firearm Owners’ Protection Act, which eons ago I helped write. It defines engaged in the business as (going off memory) the repetitive acquisition and disposition of firearms, for the principal objective of livelihood a profit, as distinct…
Continue Reading Senate gun bill

More on Hunter’s gun.

“It’s hard to believe that anyone is so stupid … so what’s my fault here Hallie that you speak of. Owning a gun that’s in a locked car hidden on another property,” Hunter Biden scolded Hallie in another text at 6:47 p.m. Oct. 23 before asking: “Do you want me dead.”

At that point, Hallie Biden attempted to defend her actions, telling Hunter that “I just want you safe. That was not safe” and adding that the car where she found the gun was “open unlocked and windows down and the kids search your car.”…
Continue Reading Biden gun handling techniques

Saul Cornell’s argument is here.

Robert Leider’s reply is here.

I think Leider gets much the better of the exchange. Not that a law enacted in one state, or an ordinance in one city, in the 1860s gives much insight into what the American people understood by the words “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.”
Continue Reading Debate on early 19th century gun laws