The question for the court would be IMO can there be constitutional descretion that is objective but allows for CLEO subjectively to deny a permit.
I guess that sounds like a square circle but is this an all in or out proposition?
Can descretion be allowed within a range of obejctive measures? Or would the court take the rigid checklist approach and insist that if one meets A,B,C criteria give them the permit? Would that lead states to then create A-ZZZ criteria instead of A,B,C?
As I stated, and showed in Michigan's CPL application, objective measures carry the day. (There are ALOT of them.
I would imagine the liberal Justices would go along with a subjective approval procedure because it would dramatically reduce the number of people allowed to conceal carry (i.e., maintain the status quo so to speak).
How do you apply due process in a may issue procedural situation? You can't IMHO. You have to have objective tests that provide clear evidence a person does or doesn't qualify IMHO. You have to leave subjectivity out of the equation or you end up with the ridiculous situations we see in the VAST majority of may issue States.
How will the conservative Justices look at this issue?........probably go with objective criteria only. It fits the due process requirements. Since objective standards clearly qualify under due process, why would they go for a convoluted may issue scheme? Much like they asked Gura, "if due process will give you what you want, why are you arguing for P&I".
There's absolutely no reason to allow a may issue scheme when shall issue statutes satisfy due process IMHO.
But I really have no idea how this will go with any real confidence TG. We'll just have to wait and see in this or future cases.