View Single Post
Old November 27, 2012, 10:52 AM   #68
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,306
The decision of the district court is affirmed.

Kachalsky et al. v. Cty. of Westchester et al.

The CA2 panel did exactly what many of us thought. Although the suit was aimed at carry in public, as part and parcel of the right, the court looked only at concealed carry and concluded that the NY State law was a valid regulation. This, regardless of the fact that open carry is completely banned. The court sweeps past this with barely any regard at all.

The court does spend 2 pages of writing on why they will not address 2A concerns by importing certain 1A standards. This, despite the fact that the CA4 and CA3 (and even another CA2 panel - US v. DeCastro) did import some of that reasoning.

The core of the right, as seen by this CA2 panel, is "in the home." Anything else deserves less scrutiny. Here, the court couches its "reasonable regulation" in terms of intermediate scrutiny. This, like so many district court decisions is nothing more than rational basis in which the law stands.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04574 seconds with 7 queries