2A Lawsuits and their progress we have here in NY

[m1_ping]

I just read the Motion for the TRO, and if this is not granted this time, then I truly fear we are lost as a nation. It is so damn clear cut that one should be granted against NY and the bullshit CCIA.

I take a more optimistic view. I give the TRO a 25% chance of happening. When a court considers a TRO they take into consideration more than just the merits of the case. This works against us, but when we eventually get to a final decision the merits are all the court takes into consideration. I give the preliminary injunction a 75% chance of happening in some form. When a court considers a preliminary injunction they again take into consideration more than just the merits of the cases, but the standard is not as high as it is for a TRO. I give the permanent injunction a 80% chance of happening. The controlling case law (Heller, McDonald, Bruen) is clearly on our side and despite district court judges not liking it I believe most will go along with it with the exception of a few activist judges. I believe some but not all or even most Democrat nominated judges are activist judges. For these same reasons I think we have similar odds of a permanent injunction surviving appeal to the second circuit. It will come down to which judges are assigned the case and if we get unlucky enough to get two or more activist judges. Trump had 5 appointees join the second circuit, but unfortunately Biden has already gotten 5 as well.

 

[Saltwater60]

I take a more optimistic view. I give the TRO a 25% chance of happening. When a court considers a TRO they take into consideration more than just the merits of the case. This works against us, but when we eventually get to a final decision the merits are all the court takes into consideration. I give the preliminary injunction a 75% chance of happening in some form. When a court considers a preliminary injunction they again take into consideration more than just the merits of the cases, but the standard is not as high as it is for a TRO. I give the permanent injunction a 80% chance of happening. The controlling case law (Heller, McDonald, Bruen) is clearly on our side and despite district court judges not liking it I believe most will go along with it with the exception of a few activist judges. I believe some but not all or even most Democrat nominated judges are activist judges. For these same reasons I think we have similar odds of a permanent injunction surviving appeal to the second circuit. It will come down to which judges are assigned the case and if we get unlucky enough to get two or more activist judges. Trump had 5 appointees join the second circuit, but unfortunately Biden has already gotten 5 as well.

I hope you’re right.
Here is my problem or my concerns, we’re in NYS so what would happen to an activist judge if they violated their oath and decided against us? My guess is nothing, nothing at all and it would cost us more time and more money to appeal it. Welcome to the new world for gun owners.
I think at best they will say some se stance places violate our rights and then it will be up to businesses to put up a no gun sign and those signs will have the power of law. Now will they be able to make them a felony? I do t know because then wouldn’t the no shoes, no shirt violations be a felony then as well?
I’m sorry for being so negative but I have lost all faith. Clearly they(hochul and company) knew this violated Bruen and they still did it. Well they aren’t stupid so why did they do it? There’s a reason and it’s more than we will just see what sticks.
I hope I’m wrong.

 

[US RIFLE M1A]

Syracuse federal judge called NY gun law illegal. Latest case may give him chance to strike it down

It is possible the key challenge to New York's recent gun law may be decided in Syracuse. Other lawsuits remain pending across the state.

www.syracuse.com

 

[camper4lyfe]

Syracuse federal judge called NY gun law illegal. Latest case may give him chance to strike it down

It is possible the key challenge to New York's recent gun law may be decided in Syracuse. Other lawsuits remain pending across the state.

www.syracuse.com

I didn't think Suddaby was hearing this case

 

[US RIFLE M1A]

I didn't think Suddaby was hearing this case

I have no idea how accurate the article is. What I do know, in response to Ping's statistics above, my fleece jacket has a 100% chance of hiding my sidearm until April. Not that I am admitting to intending to violate the new law or anything...

 

[camper4lyfe]

I have no idea how accurate the article is. What I do know, in response to Ping's statistics above, my fleece jacket has a 100% chance of hiding my sidearm until April. Not that I am admitting to intending to violate the new law or anything...

You're farther ahead than I am. I refuse to give up my social media, and can't finance the training.

 

[Egret-II]

 

[m1_ping]

Order from the court:

TEXT ORDER denying 6 Plaintiffs' application for an Order to Show Cause as unsupported by the affidavit required by Local Rule 7.1(e) of the Local Rules of Practice for this Court, and reserving decision on 6 Plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order and 6 their motion for preliminary injunction pending further briefing and oral argument. Defendants' response to Plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order is due by the end of WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 2022, and may come in the form of a letter-brief (or letter-briefs). Oral argument (without witness testimony) on Plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order is scheduled for 11:00 a.m. on THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2022, before the undersigned in Syracuse, New York. Defendants' response to Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction is due by the end of THURSDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2022; and Plaintiffs' reply to Defendants' response is due by the end of THURSDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2022. An in-person hearing on Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction (at which testimony will be adduced) shall be scheduled in a future Text Order. SO ORDERED by U.S. District Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 9/23/2022. (sal ) (Entered: 09/23/2022)

The court has scheduled oral arguments for the TRO on Thursday at 11am in Syracuse. Defendant's response is due Wednesday. Briefings and a hearing for the preliminary injunction will follow in October and possibly into November.

 

[camper4lyfe]

So apparently Suddaby IS hearing this. I swear I read that he wasn't. This could go well since he all but laid out the road map in his first dismissal.

 

[m1_ping]

So apparently Suddaby IS hearing this. I swear I read that he wasn't. This could go well since he all but laid out the road map in his first dismissal.

You may be thinking of NYSRPA v. Bruen II. That case was assigned to Judge Suddaby per plaintiff's claim of the case being related to Antonyuk v. Bruen. The court rejected that claim and the case was assigned randomly to a different judge.

 

[Jchrisls]

So does this mean an injunction could come as early as next Friday?

 

[camper4lyfe]

You may be thinking of NYSRPA v. Bruen II. That case was assigned to Judge Suddaby per plaintiff's claim of the case being related to Antonyuk v. Bruen. The court rejected that claim and the case was assigned randomly to a different judge.

Ah, most likely. I'm losing track of what's what at this point.

 

[m1_ping]

So does this mean an injunction could come as early as next Friday?

No, but a temporary restraining order (TRO) could come as early as next Friday Thursday. If we get the TRO it would prohibit enforcement of any of the challenged laws that the court includes in the TRO. The TRO would likely be set to expire at the time in which the court has had an opportunity to make a ruling on the motion for a preliminary injunction. A TRO and an injunction both can prohibit enforcement of the challenged laws but they are issued in different ways and for different reasons.

Edit: The court could issue the TRO at the oral arguments on Thursday, however I would assign this scenario low probability.

 

[Egret-II]

I have a question. Now that it's not up to a judge to decide who gets a full carry. Why do we still have to wait 2 to 3 weeks with amendments to add a handgun to our permits? Cant they just add the serial number to your permit right there at the county clerk's office?

 

[US RIFLE M1A]

The Antonyuk II brief is very well constructed. I particularly like the heads-up the plaintiff gave the judge that the state is a slippery animal. The brief reminds the judge that in NYSRPA 1 the state voided out a law that prohibited guns from leaving NYC in order that SCOTUS not hear the case at all (rendered the complaint moot). Then they come back full circle with CCIA and screwed gun owners in a similar way, by not allowing some people to leave their homes at all such as in the Catskill Park.

Most likely reminding the judge to issue a broad ruling against the state lest they come back in some other devious way.

 

[US RIFLE M1A]

I have a question. Now that it's not up to a judge to decide who gets a full carry. Why do we still have to wait 2 to 3 weeks with amendments to add a handgun to our permits? Cant they just add the serial number to your permit right there at the county clerk's office?

It is still up to a judge. The judge cannot demand that the applicant demonstrate a need beyond the average person for self defense (discretionary licensing).

But he can jerk off to pics of my wife at the beach while looking at our Fakebook. That he can do.

 

[C3D]

It is of intense frustration to me that Antonyuk 2 does not seek to enjoin the need to have a non-NYC issued pistol license be given a special permit granting validity by the NYPD for CCW in New York City. It would seem a simple argument: if the process for a pistol license to be issued is by means of a uniform statewide process, why does NYC require a repetition of that process for someone who lives in Westchester, or Nassau, or Suffolk, etc? Bruen took pains to point out that New York City is not "special".

 

[Egret-II]

It is of intense frustration to me that Antonyuk 2 does not seek to enjoin the need to have a non-NYC issued pistol license be given a special permit granting validity by the NYPD for CCW in New York City. It would seem a simple argument: if the process for a pistol license to be issued is by means of a uniform statewide process, why does NYC require a repetition of that process for someone who lives in Westchester, or Nassau, or Suffolk, etc? Bruen took pains to point out that New York City is not "special".

Westchester residents have to go through the same process as NYC now. Why cant we carry there then? It doesnt make any sense.

 

[Jchrisls]

Westchester residents have to go through the same process as NYC now. Why cant we carry there then? It doesnt make any sense.

From 30 thousand feet, if a NYS permit is for NYS, why does anyone need any type of special permit in NYC? Isn't it part of NYS? (Although many wish it wasn't)

 

[Steal2B]

It is still up to a judge. The judge cannot demand that the applicant demonstrate a need beyond the average person for self defense (discretionary licensing).

But he can jerk off to pics of my wife at the beach while looking at our Fakebook. That he can do.

Now, if you get a private message asking if you could post a link to your Facebook account in the NYGF "The BAR" section, it's probably one of those NYSP monitors assigned to this forum. I understand they are a frisky bunch on the night shift.

 

[FrankenCub]

I have a question. Now that it's not up to a judge to decide who gets a full carry. Why do we still have to wait 2 to 3 weeks with amendments to add a handgun to our permits? Cant they just add the serial number to your permit right there at the county clerk's office?

Still have to pay a tax to get it. I don't know about the rest of the state but here in Broome you're looking at least $600-$700 by time you pay for the permit and required course.

 

[Acer-m14]

Still have to pay a tax to get it. I don't know about the rest of the state but here in Broome you're looking at least $600-$700 by time you pay for the permit and required course.

last i knew here it was 10 bucks to get the permit paperwork to fill out .. and that is a poll tax ..

it should all be free of charge .. or scrap it ..

 

[Saltwater60]

Still have to pay a tax to get it. I don't know about the rest of the state but here in Broome you're looking at least $600-$700 by time you pay for the permit and required course.

It will be at least that in Erie county now.
$20 for the county application submission
$125-$150 for finger prints
And now they are staying $500 for the new training. Also there was a $60-$75 course previous to this that I’m assuming will no longer be needed.

 

[FrankenCub]

If it comes down to the state demanding this training I'll end up needing to transfer all of my firearms to an FFL because there's no way I'll have that kind of cash.

 

[Dr. Evil]

CCIA. Concealed Carry Infringement Act.

 

[Gunright]

It is still up to a judge. The judge cannot demand that the applicant demonstrate a need beyond the average person for self defense (discretionary licensing).

But he can jerk off to pics of my wife at the beach while looking at our Fakebook. That he can do.

Can you share those pictures here?

 

[Gunright]

Now, if you get a private message asking if you could post a link to your Facebook account in the NYGF "The BAR" section, it's probably one of those NYSP monitors assigned to this forum. I understand they are a frisky bunch on the night shift.

Oops, I hope I don't get accused of being one. Of course, I asked in the public forum, not via PM.

 

[Beerman]

Can you share those pictures here?

Not sure if asking for pics of wife, or pics of the judge?

 

[LibertyWins]

You're farther ahead than I am. I refuse to give up my social media, and can't finance the training.

I still want to know what would happen if one were to simply say they don't have any social media. I mean, honestly, many people really don't have any. It's not like it's a law to have and use social media accounts.

What are they going to do? Deny your application and tell you to create social media accounts, let them mature and then reapply in a few years? Hell no! I don't see how they can deny anyone who says they don't use social media.

 

[camper4lyfe]

I still want to know what would happen if one were to simply say they don't have any social media. I mean, honestly, many people really don't have any. It's not like it's a law to have and use social media accounts.

What are they going to do? Deny your application and tell you to create social media accounts, let them mature and then reapply in a few years? Hell no! I don't see how they can deny anyone who says they don't use social media.

Right, but at the same time if you're caught lying, you'll be screwed.