Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch Blast SCOTUS for Refusing to Hear Major Second Amendment Case - Hit & Run : Reason.com - Damon Root:
June 26, 2017 - "Today the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a major case out of California that asked whether the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms includes the right to carry firearms in public. By refusing to get involved, the Court left in place a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit that denied constitutional recognition to the right to carry.
"Writing in dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, blasted the Court for its failure to act and for its 'distressing trend' of treating 'the Second Amendment as a disfavored right'....
"Thomas offered a sharply worded case for why the Court should have taken up the question. Federal circuits, he pointed out, have reached different conclusions and are therefore irrevocably split on this pressing constitutional matter. 'This Court has already suggested that the Second Amendment protects the right to carry firearms in public in some fashion' ... Thomas observed....
"Today's case, known as Peruta v. California, centered on a state law that says that conceal-carry permits will only be issued to those persons who have demonstrated to the satisfaction of their local county sheriff that they have a 'good cause' for carrying a concealed firearm in public.... In the words of one San Diego official, 'one's personal safety is not considered good cause' in and of itself.
"What this means in practice, as one earlier court ruling observed, is that 'in California the only way that the typical responsible, law-abiding citizen can carry a weapon in public for the lawful purpose of self-defense is with a concealed-carry permit. And, in San Diego County, that option has been taken off the table.'"
Read more: http://reason.com/blog/2017/06/26/clarence-thomas-neil-gorsuch-second-amen
'via Blog this'
June 26, 2017 - "Today the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a major case out of California that asked whether the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms includes the right to carry firearms in public. By refusing to get involved, the Court left in place a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit that denied constitutional recognition to the right to carry.
"Writing in dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, blasted the Court for its failure to act and for its 'distressing trend' of treating 'the Second Amendment as a disfavored right'....
"Thomas offered a sharply worded case for why the Court should have taken up the question. Federal circuits, he pointed out, have reached different conclusions and are therefore irrevocably split on this pressing constitutional matter. 'This Court has already suggested that the Second Amendment protects the right to carry firearms in public in some fashion' ... Thomas observed....
"Today's case, known as Peruta v. California, centered on a state law that says that conceal-carry permits will only be issued to those persons who have demonstrated to the satisfaction of their local county sheriff that they have a 'good cause' for carrying a concealed firearm in public.... In the words of one San Diego official, 'one's personal safety is not considered good cause' in and of itself.
"What this means in practice, as one earlier court ruling observed, is that 'in California the only way that the typical responsible, law-abiding citizen can carry a weapon in public for the lawful purpose of self-defense is with a concealed-carry permit. And, in San Diego County, that option has been taken off the table.'"
Read more: http://reason.com/blog/2017/06/26/clarence-thomas-neil-gorsuch-second-amen
'via Blog this'
No comments:
Post a Comment