The Second Amendment has been under assault for years. We’ve all endured at least some degree of that assault, either at the federal or state level. Some of us have even dealt with it locally.
Yet there’s one place we’ve been able to fight back, and that’s the courts.
A lot of laws have disappeared not because legislatures changed their minds, but because the courts overturned the legislation.
Now, a big case is before the Supreme Court and we’re just waiting for the decision to come down. However, if that one goes the way pretty much everyone expects, what’s next?
The Supreme Court will soon make a decision in a case over whether New Yorkers have the right to carry concealed handguns in public for self-defense, which could prompt the high court to examine other Second Amendment cases in the lower court pipeline, according to a high-profile lawyer representing plaintiffs in the Empire State.
Attorney Paul Clement was the lead advocate before the Supreme Court in November when justices heard New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen,a lawsuit surrounding two men who were denied a special need or “proper cause” for self-defense that is required under a long-standing New York law to receive an unrestricted license to carry a concealed pistol or revolver.
If the court sides with the plaintiffs, it is “quite possible” it could spur justices to tackle cases over restrictions on high-capacity magazines in California and New Jersey, Clement said Wednesday during a closed member briefing before the House Republican Future of American Freedoms Task Force and viewed by the Washington Examiner.
“You know, it’s quite possible that if we win in the New York carry case, that a bunch of these cases that are being held by the Supreme Court … awaiting their decision [will be] sent back to the lower courts, but if the lower courts don’t get the message this time around, then I think that’ll be the next issue up for the Supreme Court,” Clement said.
In other breaking news, the sky is blue.
Look, Second Amendment advocates have been waiting for more than a decade to challenge many of the gun control laws we currently see on the books. Previous courts have refused to hear any of a number of cases, including ones that really should have been addressed such as assault weapon bans.
Yet NYSRPA vs. Bruen marks the first time we’ve seen the Court willing to issue a decision on the Second Amendment since McDonald. This suggests the current court is finally willing to listen to how modern gun control is a direct infringement of our civil liberties.
You better believe people are going to take advantage. After all, we don’t know how long we’re going to have this majority on the Court so we’d best make use of it while it’s there.
At least, we will until we start getting signals that our efforts are wasted. Even then, though, still expect some to continue testing the waters.
The truth is, with some legislatures, you’re never going to get pro-gun laws passed. The best you can do is have the courts overturn anti-gun measures.
Frankly, that works just as well.