Everytown's Federal Legal Director says that this lawsuit "is about the NRA's radical gun agenda, not the law," and that it "has nothing to do with the Constitution and everything to do with gun industry profits."
Everytown's Federal Legal Director says that "the NRA wants to use this case as a first step towards rolling back hundreds of gun safety laws across the country" and that it will "put nearly every gun safety law at risk"
Everytown's Federal Legal Director says that "record gun sales" is a reason why "now is the time we can least afford to roll back our gun safety laws."
Everytown's "Second Amendment Fellow" now explaining what the Supreme Court is
Everytown's Second Amendment Fellow blames the individual right to bear arms on NRA-funded scholarship in the 70s
Everytown's Deputy Director of Second Amendment Litigation talks about NYSRPA v. NYC, reminds viewers that *this time* all the bad stuff is going to happen
Everytown's Deputy Director says other states have may-issue laws like NY and that 25% of the population lives in them.
For those of you doing that math, that means 75% of the country already lives in the lawless wasteland they warn NY will turn into if it becomes shall-issue.
Everytown's Deputy Director mentions the amicus briefs from the NAACP, ACLU, and police in support of New York's carry laws.
Everytown's Deputy Director is hoping that Justice Roberts will want to uphold New York's carry laws.
Everytown's Deputy Director reminds viewers to not get the impression that he's optimistic about this case
Everytown's Federal Legal Director says the fact that the NRA brought this lawsuit up to the Supreme Court "isn't a sign of public support" and is actually "the gun lobby's last ditch effort to defend a radical agenda"
Everytown's Second Amendment Fellow says the "best case scenario" (where the Supreme Court upholds New York's law and doesn't announce a new standard of review for 2nd Amendment cases) "seems a little bit unlikely"
Everytown's Second Amendment Fellow says "the NRA and others will try to seize on what the court says" and try to re-litigate prior 2A cases.
The host asks viewers to sign up for the "Everytown Twitter Team"
Maybe it's just me, but it sounds like everything the speakers say was pre-written.
Schrödinger's NRA makes an appearance: Simultaneously much less powerful than it used to be, but also about to single-handedly turn the entire country into a guns-everywhere dystopia.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"We are public defenders. New York’s gun laws eviscerate our clients’ Second Amendment rights." scotusblog.com/2021/10/we-are…
"Faced with a 3.5-year mandatory minimum prison sentence, Jose pled to a lesser charge. His sentence was one year on Rikers Island — a 'good deal' for simple firearm possession in New York City. For exercising a constitutional right, Jose is now a so-called violent felon."
"That licensing requirement is the key to New York’s ban on firearm possession: It is a pretext whose true purpose is to make firearm possession unlawful. For our clients, it makes the Second Amendment a legal fiction."
New York v. NRA (NY state court): National Rifle Association's opposition to motion to intervene
"This baseless Motion is a transparent effort by a member of the Association to frustrate the collective will of millions of members..." iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDoc…
Nelson asks McDougall about mootness. Asks if it fits into capable of repetition but evading review, or should be just kept alive for damages. McDougall says the county never said they wouldn't do it again, and they still have the power to do it again.
NYSRPA v. Bruen (#SCOTUS, 20-843): Reply brief for petitioners
"The state now retreats to the equally indefensible claims that the right vanishes in 'populous areas' and extends only to those with a 'non-speculative need' to exercise it." supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/2…
"When the state is not rewriting the historical record, it is attacking arguments petitioners did not make, while defending a law it did not pass and licenses it did not issue."
"The Court should reverse the decision below and hold that petitioners have a right to do what even the state now concedes the Constitution protects: bear arms outside the home for self-defense."
NEW: Fischer v. Remington (S.D. OH): Federal judge orders man to pay Hornady $3,600 after falsely claiming that his rifle contained the company's ammo when it exploded, when it was actually using handloaded ammo from 1993. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Mr. Shope sent a letter to the court last May after learning that Hornady wanted sanctions against him, where he said that the company "was kinda nasty with me" and that "it wasn't a deliberate lie or my grandson would have won, not lost."