BREAKING #2A News: A New York Supreme Court Justice ruled that N.Y.’s Red Flag laws are unconstitutional.
"It can not be stated clearly enough that the Second Amendment is not a second class right, nor should it ever be treated as such." nycourts.gov/Reporter/3dser…
Here are the facts:
On August 30, 2022, petitioner G.W. filed an application for a Temporary Extreme Risk Protection Order ("TERPO"). In his application G.W. alleged that his estranged girlfriend, C. N., was a threat to herself, the petitioner, or another person.
In support of his TERPO request, G.W. submitted various statements in which he alleges Ms. N. indicated that she would harm herself by means of a gun or firearm, should she be able to gain access to same.
However, the allegations submitted to this Court (and accompanying the TERPO request) were statements allegedly made by Ms. N. from December 5, 2020, up through and including February 27, 2021. Regardless, Mr. W.'s petition alleged Ms. N.'s acts occurred less than six months ago.
In an abundance of caution, on August 30, 2022 the Court issued a TERPO order which prohibited Ms. N. from purchasing or possessing any firearms, rifles or shotguns, and ordered her to surrender any within her possession.
Ms. N. held a pistol permit that had previously been issued by a Monroe County Court Judge. On September 7, 2022 Monroe County Court Judge Julie Hahn suspended Ms. N.'s pistol permit based upon the allegations in the TERPO petition and the issuance of the TERPO order.
Thereafter, Mr. W. submitted a supplemental affidavit in support of his request for a final Extreme Risk Protection Order ("ERPO"). Mr. W.'s affidavit alleged that Ms. N. was attempting to access Mr. W.'s safe at the house that was presently occupied by Ms. N.
Further, Mr. W. alleged that this safe contained "weapons" or guns that could be used by Ms. N. to hurt herself, petitioner or others.
Prior to a hearing being there was a constitutional challenge made to CPLR §6342.
The question presented is whether CPLR Article 63-a sufficiently protects a New York citizen's due process rights when, as here, the state denies a fundamental right, to wit: by infringing on that citizen's right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment.
The Court held that CPLR §63-a does not sufficiently protect a citizen's rights and therefore is unconstitutional.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"People have heard about Uvalde, Texas. They have heard about Sandy Hook, Parkland, the Pulse nightclub, and other tragic mass shootings. But they do not hear of the AR-15 used in Florida by a pregnant wife and mother to defend her family from two armed, hooded, and masked home intruders."
"As soon as the armed intruders entered the back door of her home they pistol-whipped her husband -- fracturing his eye socket and sinus cavity. Then they grabbed the 11-year old daughter. The pregnant wife and mother was able to retrieve the family AR-15 from a bedroom and fire, killing one of the attackers while the other fled."
"It does not require much imagination to think what would have happened next if the woman had lived in California and could not possess such a firearm."
Breaking 2nd Amendment victory out of the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (NJ, PA, DE). En banc panel finds that a person with a State food stamp fraud conviction punishable with imprisonment up to 5 years should not be deprived of #2A rights. www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/21283…
Court's reasoning:
"We begin with the threshold question: whether Range is one of 'the people' who have Second Amendment rights."
"First, the criminal histories of the plaintiffs in Heller, McDonald, and Bruen were not at issue in those cases. So their references to… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
"—to conclude that Range is not among 'the people' for Second Amendment purposes would exclude him from [having rights to assemble peaceably, to petition the government for redress, and to be protected against unreasonable searches and seizures.]"
BREAKING #2A News: Federal District Court Judge issues preliminary injunction temporarily blocking the State of New Jersey's new gun laws. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
"...what the State and the Legislature-Intervenors ignore, and what their empirical evidence fails to address, is that this legislation is aimed primarily—not at those who unlawfully possess firearms—but at law-abiding, responsible citizens who satisfy detailed background and… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
"Our Founding Fathers were aware of the dangers such laws pose. In his Commonplace Book, Thomas Jefferson quoted from Italian philosopher Cesare Beccaria’s work, On Crime and Punishment, where Beccaria discussed the 'False Ideas of Utility':
As a Jewish American, I offer the "Warsaw Ghetto Uprising" as an example of the importance of the Second Amendment and why it was designed to protect the average civilian's right to own rifles that may be used in a theater of war.
"On April 19, 1943, the eve of the Passover holiday, the Jews of the Warsaw ghetto began their final act of armed resistance against the Germans. Lasting twenty-seven days, this act of resistance came to be known as the Warsaw ghetto uprising."
"The Jewish Combat Organization (ŻOB) had received advanced warning of a final deportation action planned by the Germans. In response, the ŻOB warned residents of the ghetto to retreat to their hiding places or bunkers."
BREAKING #2A News: Federal District Court Judge in Illinois enters preliminary injunction blocking State's new “assault weapon” ban, limiting magazine capacity to 10 rounds, and creating a registry for currently owned semi-automatic rifles. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
"As Americans, we have every reason to celebrate our rights and freedoms, especially on Independence Day."
"Can the senseless crimes of a relative few be so despicable to justify the infringement of the constitutional rights of law-abiding individuals in hopes that such crimes will then abate or, at least, not be as horrific?"
The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that placing a bump stock on a semi-automatic rifle does not make it 'machinegun' as defined by the National Firearms Act of 1934. opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/2…
"The weight of authority concludes that the definition of a machinegun is ambiguous as applied to a bump stock. Hardin argues that the statutory definition of a machinegun unambiguously excludes bump stocks, whereas the ATF argues that the best reading of the statute compels the… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
"The viability of competing interpretations is exemplified not only by the myriad and conflicting judicial opinions on this issue, but also by the ATF’s own flip-flop in its position. And because the statute is 'subject to more than one reasonable interpretation,' it is… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…