What the Supreme Court Won’t do for Our Right to Bear Arms

Why I Am Suing The Governor of Virginia, iStock-1055138108
What the Supreme Court Won’t do for Our Right to Bear Arms iStock-1055138108

U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- State legislators denied the ordinary person the right to bear arms in New York. That decision was upheld in state and lower courts. In New York City, the “privilege” to defend yourself with a firearm in public is only given to a select few. You need not apply unless you are an ex-law enforcement officer, a judge, a politician, or an elite celebrity. That privilege is paid for with political power or campaign donations. Remember that the bill of rights is designed to limit the actions of the government. Big government politicians turned that on its head so they could sell our rights back to a select few of us at exorbitant prices. Now, the US Supreme court will decide if the second amendment is a real right or only a forgettable footnote in the bill of rights.

The Supreme Court’s decision won’t change the laws in New York, let alone change the similar laws in California, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode Island. The court decision, at most, might say that the New York law is unconstitutional and infringes on the right to bear arms. The ruling might give guidance on the level of scrutiny to use when judges decide carry permit cases in the lower courts. There is no guarantee that the New York state legislature will follow the spirit of the court’s decision. The law they write might have to be litigated again if the new law also infringes on the right of ordinary citizens to bear arms. That court fight takes years if not decades.

The constitution does not enforce itself. At best, an expansive reading of the right to bear arms by the Supreme Court will allow advocates to bring suit in other states. They can challenge existing laws one at a time. For example, our reading of the court’s decision may indicate that laws in New Jersey are unconstitutional, but our opinion doesn’t matter. It is the opinion of judges at the district, appellate and circuit level that matters. We’ve already seen these judges ignore Supreme Court cases that support the right to bear arms like Heller and McDonald. At best, a favorable ruling might give us another tool in our appeals, but our rights are not secure.

The New York legislature might take parts of the most objectionable laws from other states and claim that their new permitting scheme satisfies the court’s ruling. The legislature has already returned criminals to the streets of our inner cities. Through expensive fees and bureaucratic delays, the legislature might again deny ordinary citizens the right of armed defense in public for reasons of “public safety” and “protecting vulnerable minorities”. The people most at risk from violent crime are poor minority women in our inner cities. They could again be disarmed by progressive politicians, by activist judges, and by a complicit press.

 

Even a favorable inclined supreme court only takes a fraction of one percent of the cases that are submitted for review. This case is another step to protect our right to bear arms, but it is not the last step. We’ve seen activist judges and politicians ignore the law before. I expect them to do so again.

“Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end.
But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”

Winston Churchill


About Rob Morse

The original article, with sources, is posted here. Rob Morse writes about gun rights at Ammoland, at Clash Daily, at Second Call Defense, and on his SlowFacts blog. He hosts the Self Defense Gun Stories Podcast and co-hosts the Polite Society Podcast. Rob was an NRA pistol instructor and combat handgun competitor.Rob Morse

Subscribe
Notify of
70 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Monkey Mouse
Monkey Mouse (@monkey-mouse)
1 month ago

My home state of NJ already said a while ago that they would not follow any ruling against the state’s cc laws by the SCOTUS or any other federal court. What do you do with these people besides roll in and start “painting houses” to quote a recent mob film?

del
del (@dmcclintock)
1 month ago
Reply to  Monkey Mouse

whenever the legislators endeavour to take away, and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any farther obedience, and are left to the common refuge, which God hath provided for all men, against force and violence.
-from Locke’s 2nd Treatise

Last edited 1 month ago by del
BaerArms
BaerArms (@baerarms)
1 month ago
Reply to  Monkey Mouse

dont leave a body

swmft
swmft (@swmft)
1 month ago
Reply to  BaerArms

there are so many in new jersey just needs dna disrupted so nothing to compare , so chipper and a microwave (radar dish will do)

swmft
swmft (@swmft)
1 month ago
Reply to  Monkey Mouse

it is gods laws send him a contingent and let him sort them out , government does not follow law there are none. machine guns for all and use them

Bill
Bill (@bill1776)
1 month ago

Violation of people’s rights, accomplished with the stroke of a politician’s pen. Restoration of rights, accomplished, if at all, by years of litigation, numerous lawsuits, and ruinous financial burdens. Often never accomplished at all. So-called justice in America.

Cruiser
Cruiser (@cop1771)
1 month ago
Reply to  Bill

“It’s not a justice system, it’s just a system.”

swmft
swmft (@swmft)
1 month ago
Reply to  Cruiser

you left out “control “@Cruiser A legal system would follow rules and retain safeguards a illegal system would change rules and disregard safeguards at will ,which is what we have

Cruiser
Cruiser (@cop1771)
1 month ago

I am prepared because of this
Could not attach imiage

Last edited 1 month ago by Cruiser
Vince Warde
Vince Warde (@vincewarde)
1 month ago

First of all, much is right and much is wrong about this post. Rob is 100% correct that the ruling will not remove every barrier to carry. It will, however, likely require states to issue licenses to all who pass REASONABLE training and background check requirements. NY and my former state of CA will still try to restrict carry, but IL shows us what will happen if “good cause” requirements are struck down: The average person will be able to get a license to carry. Furthermore, if they wish to do so, the high court could issue a sweeping, Roe… Read more »

DDS
DDS (@dds)
1 month ago
Reply to  Vince Warde

They could also require lower courts to use Strict Scrutiny when ruling on RKBA cases as is already done on cases involving other civil rights.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/strict_scrutiny

Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
1 month ago
Reply to  DDS

That would be excellent, and possible. I like those positive waves, brother!

swmft
swmft (@swmft)
1 month ago
Reply to  Vince Warde

if it was stated ,that government can not be trusted to regulate this right atf would be gutted overnight

Big George
Big George (@biggeo44)
1 month ago

NO 2A case will ever be awarded in our favor as long as the turn-coat cry baby Roberts is on the SCOTUS!

Vince Warde
Vince Warde (@vincewarde)
1 month ago
Reply to  Big George

Roberts may be the Chief Justice, but he is ultimately only one vote. We have a 5-4 pro-2A majority without him. That is why the case was taken in the first place.

Oldman
Oldman (@crazyphone)
1 month ago
Reply to  Vince Warde

Your math does not quite add up; just sayin’

DDS
DDS (@dds)
1 month ago
Reply to  Oldman

You realize that in today’s “woke” culture, insisting on correct answers is racist.

😉

Oldman
Oldman (@crazyphone)
1 month ago
Reply to  DDS

LOL! Except for the Trolls, I don’t believe there are very many of us here that identify with being “woke”.

Autsin Miller III
Autsin Miller III (@austin-miller-iii)
1 month ago
Reply to  Oldman

That’s a fact. Read the other day that being on time is now considered a race thing. Called a black friend of mine who is adamant about being on time and shared the article with him…it was worth the time. This “Woke” thing will pass just as the bell bottoms did and beatles hair cuts and I can’t wait.

Big George
Big George (@biggeo44)
1 month ago
Reply to  Vince Warde

Yes…BUT as the CJ of the Court, he may be only one vote, but he determines which cases are heard before the full Court!

Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
1 month ago
Reply to  Vince Warde

I think that Thomas, Gorsuch, Alito, and Barett are “sort of” in our corner. That is three maybe four. Just my opinion.

JimmyS
JimmyS (@jimmys)
1 month ago

Elites wearing black robes don’t decide my rights, nor do they decide what is right or wrong, nor do they have any validity at all, above that which all of us decide to give them. That is true of the rest of the government as well. It has no inherent validity or any power at all, aside from the power the rest of us allow it to exercise. Or not.

I am firmly on the “Or Not” side now, and there is no going back. Despots must be stopped in their despotism. That is all.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
1 month ago
Reply to  JimmyS

Go get them, tiger!

Boz
Boz (@boz)
1 month ago

SCROTUS has been compromised.

TStheDeplorable
TStheDeplorable (@tvsteinke)
1 month ago

I disagree that the decision will have as little impact as you predict, though you are absolutely correct that New York will dance around what the Supreme Court orders, and New York will impose any limit it thinks it can get away with. But the Supreme Court really seems to be prepared for that, and will fashion its order accordingly. Recall that when this case was filed New York modified its law and tried to get the Supreme Court to declare the case moot in light of the change, and normally the Supreme Court is happy to dodge a case… Read more »

Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
1 month ago

Oh Rob. How disappointing. If you are going to talk law, you have to use the language of the law, lest you confuse concepts and people. Privilege is another word for Right. Meaning not subject to some burden or working of “the law”. See the Priviledges and Immunities clause. Please see also p 1077, Black’s Law Dictionary, Ed 5. The word or phrase that you are looking for is indulgence, special benefit, or license. Now, about your depressing guesses about what the S. Ct. will and will not do: The S. Ct. takes a special pleasure in making guessers look… Read more »

JimmyS
JimmyS (@jimmys)
1 month ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

You’re wrong. Rights precede government and law. Privileges are granted by government and law. There have been plenty of attempts to obfuscate the two, such as with the “right” to vote, and with “civil rights,” but these are just legalese lies.

Rights are certain, Creator-granted, and unalienable. Privileges are the pay you get for sucking the government’s dick.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
1 month ago
Reply to  JimmyS

Actually you would be saying that Black’s is wrong, and two semesters of Con. Law. in every law school in the country are wrong. But hey, believe what ever you like.

DDS
DDS (@dds)
1 month ago
Reply to  JimmyS

Bingo!

US v Cruikshank

Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
1 month ago
Reply to  JimmyS

I merely point out that Right, Privilege, and Immunity are synonyms, in the language of the people that wrote the Constitution and Constitutional interpretation, and the law, from that day to this.
If you want to speak, write, and think in vernacular … then … go ahead.

Tionico
Tionico (@tionico)
1 month ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

ALL of our RIGHTS precede and do not derive from any government anywhere.Why? They are fron the God who made us, and NO ONE can trump His will. No not even some compromised poitician wearing a funny black nightie. That does not mean some thugs called gummit uffishuls can’t or won’t deprive or deny us any right his gun says he can. We saw that often and in spades in the last century, and far too often in the one before tha,t even on these “hallowed shores”. How many hundred thousand lives were taken because gummit decided they wanted to… Read more »

Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
1 month ago
Reply to  Tionico

I whole heartedly agree.

Cruiser
Cruiser (@cop1771)
1 month ago

” Better to be tried by twelve, than carried by six.”
It’s your freedom, if you have to fight for it,so be it.
We fought wars in other lands to help those people gain freedom.
Why do we have to fight our own government to keep our freedom?
We have an enemy with in our own country.

Last edited 1 month ago by Cruiser
Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
1 month ago
Reply to  Cruiser

We have to fight the enemy, that we have given power to, because they are infected with greed, and there is no profit in letting us be a free people.

Cruiser
Cruiser (@cop1771)
1 month ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

Amen

Hazcat
Hazcat (@havoc816)
1 month ago

“…That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, …” I DO NOT CONSENT

Let’s Go Brandon!

Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
1 month ago
Reply to  Hazcat

Actually, you do consent each day that you stay here, and ratify the work of the founders. This was in your HS civics class.
You can “unconsent” anytime that you wish.

JimmyS
JimmyS (@jimmys)
1 month ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

Suck balls, Bill. You don’t know what you are talking about. Do you tell the kids you trick into your “play room” the same nonsense, that their consent is implied because of their presence?

Tionico
Tionico (@tionico)
1 month ago
Reply to  JimmyS

he was NOT referring to small children who do not comprehend these things. On the other hand, the milllions that wake up every morning ,down their Weetabix, dash out the door after slapping that blue napie accross their mugs, that thing that is worse than useless with respect to “keeping us safe” ffrom a fairytale boogeyman called covid, then stop by the clinic to let some overpaid dweeb poke a needle intoyour arm so you won’t have to tolerate the denial of your ability to feed your one point three kids….. those “adults” are acting lke the children you describe.… Read more »

Tionico
Tionico (@tionico)
1 month ago
Reply to  JimmyS

and what does “sucking balls” have to do with anything else said here?

Big George
Big George (@biggeo44)
1 month ago
Reply to  Tionico

Isn’t ‘sucking balls’ the Secret Service code name for SCOTUS Roberts?!

Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
1 month ago
Reply to  JimmyS

Suck balls civics class that most slept through!!!

Last edited 1 month ago by Wild Bill
Russn8r
Russn8r (@russn8r)
1 month ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

I doubt you slept through your suck balls class.

Oldman
Oldman (@crazyphone)
1 month ago
Reply to  Russn8r

Supergirl is back again. What happened to you? Must have gotten kicked off some other forum, again? Or did you just get the taste of soap outa your mouth when mommy punished you again for being a Troll

Russn8r
Russn8r (@russn8r)
1 month ago
Reply to  Oldman

Just back for a quick dump in your gvt punchbowl. How many sock puppets do copsuckers have here, “Oldman”? Too dumb to see your hall monitoring serves the ends of some agency/agencies? Or are you an agent?

Now you and your socks can double down about farming & old cars. We can always trust a ‘farmer’ or some dude who feeds livestock, likes old cars & makes wry comments implying his wife’s really the boss. Probably likes fishing too! Just a normal Joe!

Last edited 1 month ago by Russn8r
Henry Bowman
Henry Bowman (@henry_bowman)
1 month ago

Our Rights can be enforced, but only by ourselves. The framers NEVER intended for men in robes to decide what Rights we’re allowed to keep; in Marbury v Madison (1803), SCOTUS in a unanimmous decision set the bar as high as possible for the government: ANY law that violates the Constitution is VOID ‘before the ink dries’… As if it NEVER was. And they never said that a law had to be judged unconstitutional by a court before it was deemed unconstitutional by the people at large. Also, juries are to judge both the LAW and the FACTS; not just… Read more »

Rights from GOD - not govt.png
Jaque
Jaque (@jaque)
1 month ago

The 2nd Amendment is clear. So why does it take decades and billions in court costs and legal fees to see it is adhered to ? Lawmakers and judges take an oath to uphold and obey the Constitution. Yet they work to undermine it by laws and controls that inhibit the 2nd Amendment in violation of their oath.

Its a racket. Its a game. Its time for sabers and lead. Its time for a house cleaning of the Federal Government. All if it. There is no other way than slash and burn. Get er done.

Russn8r
Russn8r (@russn8r)
1 month ago
Reply to  Jaque

Wow. Who knew that?

Henry Bowman
Henry Bowman (@henry_bowman)
1 month ago
Reply to  Jaque

People are far too tolerant of “a long train of abuses”. They fight in rigged courts with pens, instead of doing their duty with lead and copper. The elitists laugh at We The People and impose ever more onerous infringements. People refuse to ‘cover the six’ of those who stand up to the tyrants, and good men end up getting hung out to dry. We have gone from “land of the brave and home of the free” to ‘land of the slave and home of the fee’! At this point, I have no confidence in others doing the right thing.… Read more »

Sam Adams - Wealth v Liberty.png
Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
1 month ago
Reply to  Henry Bowman

I like it but what is your plan?

BigJim
BigJim (@bigjim)
1 month ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

Start with the IRS and ATF regarding the tax on a right. They don’t tax Facebook for speech even though they pick and choose what is said on their platform.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
1 month ago
Reply to  BigJim

Ok, sounds good, start what?

JimmyS
JimmyS (@jimmys)
1 month ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

Open your gun safe and stop talking, Bill.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
1 month ago
Reply to  JimmyS

Take the point, brother. When you establish the FEBA, I’ll find you and bring follow on forces.

Henry Bowman
Henry Bowman (@henry_bowman)
1 month ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

Secret Suirrel says “Sssshhhhh, this is an unsecured channel”…

JimmyS
JimmyS (@jimmys)
1 month ago
Reply to  Henry Bowman

Amen.

Hazcat
Hazcat (@havoc816)
1 month ago
Reply to  Jaque

It depends on what the definition of ‘is’ is.

Let’s Go Brandon!

Deplorable Bill
Deplorable Bill (@deplorable-bill)
1 month ago

The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, that IS the law. Those who took oath to defend it and then delay or deny or tax or permit or license it are, by definition, treasonous of that oath and they are tyrannical in action. Both of those crimes are punishable by death. If I can live in peace I will but I am not surrendering my GOD given, constitutionally protected rights and freedoms to anyone much less someone who has my enslavement or demise for goals. I have very little faith in the justice system but it… Read more »

JimmyS
JimmyS (@jimmys)
1 month ago

They “forced the issue” before the ink on the Constitution had begun to fade, long before any of us had living great-grandparents. Freedom is, and has been, lost one compromise at a time. It is now a ghost, having form, but no body. We are meant to embody it. It isn’t determined by courts, it isn’t defined by the laws of men. It is embodied by those who cherish it as sacred, and act upon it with intention, commitment, and honor. Like a father feeding his family, like a mother cradling her sick child.

Deplorable Bill
Deplorable Bill (@deplorable-bill)
1 month ago
Reply to  JimmyS

Amen, see the last sentence or two of the declaration of independence. With a firm reliance on DIVINE providence, I/we pledge our lives our fortunes and our sacred honor… I’m in.

Arm up and carry on

Arizona
Arizona (@arizona)
1 month ago

When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty, so do your duty and exercise your rights.

Who cares what BS so-called “laws” they pass. Words on paper, which cannot be enforced, as they are repugnant to the Constitution, and if everyone practices civil disobedience, then their BS “laws” are defeated that much faster. Of fight it in court for the next 20 years.

buzzsaw
buzzsaw (@buzzsaw)
1 month ago

Riddle me this. Why is it that abortion became legal throughout the entire United States as soon as the Roe v. Wade ruling was handed down, while we will have to fight jurisdiction by jurisdiction over the course of decades (which some of us don’t have, and none of us are getting any younger) to get a clearly delineated constitutional right that supposedly “…shall not be infringed?”

Arizona
Arizona (@arizona)
1 month ago
Reply to  buzzsaw

Because they claim the rules are different for them. Eff that. Do what you know is right.

Henry Bowman
Henry Bowman (@henry_bowman)
1 month ago
Reply to  buzzsaw

Why??? I can answer in one word. TYRANNY.
The cure for which involves watering the Liberty Tree.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
1 month ago
Reply to  Henry Bowman

I agree with buzz, Az, and Henry, and I am up voting each of you, but what is the plan? The political hacks that infringe on our rights with bs legislation know that they can enforce their will by force of arms every day. The enforcers have logistics, weps, secure comms, command structure, and the color of authority. We have none of those, and if we tried to organize we would be infiltrated or ratted off by our own (for cash money). The first person to say the war is on and formation is at my house tomorrow at 0800… Read more »

Henry Bowman
Henry Bowman (@henry_bowman)
1 month ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

One must cover all these contingencies and screen new members, but start with people you know and trust. I cannot post the how in an open forum because as you well know, there are domestic enemies being paid to monitor comment sections and report anything that seems untoward. But there are many among us who’ve served in the military during the last 30 years and whose skillsets make them a force multiplier. We are at the tipping point and people have had it up to here [imagine my hand horizontal in front of my forehead]. They appear to be done… Read more »

Laughs in Insurgent png.png
Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
1 month ago
Reply to  Henry Bowman

And the people that you trust and screen may have weaknesses that the Fat Boy Institute can exploit. Debt is a big weakness.
Someone falls behind on payments, a mortgage, or a family member suddenly generates unpayable medical bills, then all of a sudden you become something to sell … or more properly sell-out.

Henry Bowman
Henry Bowman (@henry_bowman)
1 month ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

I’d not say that people can’t sell out, or be flipped, but on the other hand there’s a difference between being realistic and being a debbie downer…
If you know the people you intend to roll with, and I mean REALLY know them, you and your posse will be there to help the guy who’s having problems.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
1 month ago
Reply to  Henry Bowman

I hope that you are right because I like your enthusiasm.

swmft
swmft (@swmft)
1 month ago
Reply to  Henry Bowman

any laws involving guns are unconstitutional ,lawyers say only flint and matchlocks are protected, because they know if we fix the government lawyers will be gone, atf gone fbi will cease to cause crime (75known fbi agents and affiliated people were instigators on jan 6th)