Legal eagles, thoughts?

Suppressors?

Hope not as I am in the process of getting my paperwork in order. Dave

I don't see that.

I would think there is probably a case in the pipeline that pro-gun attorneys were waiting to bring forward depending upon the outcome of the Supreme Court vote.

Would love to see "Photo ID to vote" or "Drug testing for welfare" as Kav's first case.

Don't borrow trouble.

The 2nd is clear enough.

It'll be somethin' about a homo one way or the other.

Homos spend more time at the supreme court than they do at the bath houses these days.

Heller and McDonald neither one established the level of scrutiny required by lower courts when deciding 2 A cases. That needs to be done right away, applying strict scrutiny.

Yep. Kick NY, KA and a few other states right in the stones when it comes to what's allowed, free of any infringement....

Because they are already in the pipeline, as someone else noted, I'm thinking mag restrictions, semi-auto bans.............anything that might be construed as "being in common usage".

CA, NY, MA, CT etc come to mind.

Eventually we can hope for national reciprocity for carry, both concealed and open. Maybe it might even go all the way to Constitutional carry.

Hopefully, the silly CA ban on mail ordering ammo will get overturned by a court somewhere also.

Geno

My guess is a case that involves the right to carry a firearm outside the home. My read of Heller and McDonald says the right exists, but it's far from settled law.

Kavanaugh has written that handguns are protected, and most handguns are semiauto. He then said that from a legal standpoint, there is no difference between semiauto handguns and semiauto rifles. So according to him, semiauto rifles are protected. That would make some interesting fodder if someone challenges an AR ban.

Magazine capacity limits are also another interesting possibility. A magazine is a functionally necessary part of a semiauto firearm. It is therefore as protected as the firearm it fits into. If the government cannot specifically show that such equipment poses some unusual danger, or is not it common use, those laws are easily vulnerable.

My theory on why we have not seen new firearms cases is that nobody on the Court wanted to grant certiorari since they weren't sure they could get a majority behind a good decision. Somewhere, tonight, Alan Gura is quietly plotting his next six chess moves.

This.

With luck, Mag restrictions etc could be dead by June.

The other likely possibility is the death of "May Issue".

Piss on reciprocal concealed carry ! How about recognizing the 2nd amendment shall not be infringed and we all carry everywhere as we please concealed or not without begging the government ?

You can really wreck your reputation as a forecaster by trying to predict which cases SCOTUS will take or what they will decide once they take them. But it's still good fun to speculate. Many of the lower courts have stubbornly refused to apply Heller and McDonald as issued, so the next decade should be entertaining.

Who cares how they rule.

What if they have another ban on [fill in blank]?

What if they rule concealed is against the law?

What if they rule open carry is against the law?

What if they rule the 2A null and void?

What if they require you to bring all of your guns to the police station or face no warrant search of your home and jail?

What if they rule…….

At some point, people have to find their backbone to take a stand against tyranny.

The question is, what will it take for “you” to tell a tyranny government to go straight to hell and COME AND TAKE IT and shoot to kill when they do come, and carry any where you damn well please without asking their permission (purchasing a CHL license).

Bottom line, you’re either a man or a puzzy, and most so-called men are girlie-man puzzies in this day and time.

Additionally, anyone who teaches these CHL courses are scum-of-the-earth, useful-idiot-traitors to the country, because they are helping the tyranny government to “condition” the people into believing the citizens have to ask permission to utilize their God given right to “keep and bear arms”.

Idle speculation here from afar but I wouldn't mind betting short term isn't the aim, another in the Supreme Court would pave the way for a run at previous office holders.

Probably explain the near fanatical offensive thrown at Mr Kavanaugh.

Probably the case that bans democrats from owning firearms.

Polygamy

You either hold to the 2nd...or you don't.

That will be probably brought forth by the gays.

It'd be nice to see federal gun laws override state gun laws.

NYH1.

Starting with the SAFE Act.

But you were already thinking that weren't you?

I don't see how the SAFE act could get by the SCOTUS now.

The hurdles would be compelling government interest and strict scrutiny. As far as suppressors it can be shown that they are used all over the world by sportsmen and target shooters without issue.

I think these magazine limits and anti "assault weapon" things could get challenged. That would be under Miller. When the Miller decision came down the standard soldier issue was a '03 Springfield and a 1911. now it is a rifle with a changeable 30 round magazine.

As far as full autos, the NFA will not get changed on that at the federal level. It would be possible that states that ban them under state laws get challenged, but I don't think so. I don't think anyone is going to finance such a move.

It's the UNsafe Act!

FUAC!

NYH1.

I like to see "gun free zones" go away.

I'd vote...