View Single Post
Old November 4, 2021, 12:24 PM   #11
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,147
The issue for which the petitioners sought review was "Whether the Second Amendment allows the government to prohibit ordinary law-abiding citizens
from carrying handguns outside the home for self-defense".


The court accepted review with a more limited issue:

GRANTED LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTION: WHETHER THE STATE'S
DENIAL OF PETITIONERS' APPLICATIONS FOR CONCEALED-CARRY LICENSES
FOR SELF-DEFENSE VIOLATED THE SECOND AMENDMENT.

With issue framed this way, the court can find for the petitioners on a very narrow basis and not get to the broader issue of whether states have the power to ban concealed carry. They would only need to find, for example, that the discretionary character of the prohibition is inconsistent with a "right".

Or they could find it necessary to first resolve whether any incorporated fundamental right is subject to state licensing, or conceivable find that concealed carry might licensing may be unconstitutional only if open carry is also prohibited, so long as carry itself isn't prohibited.

How would a ruling apply to states? That depends on the language of the decision. If the decision is that NY overstepped by granting its people discretion over the exercise of a right, but not in regulating how people carry, I'd expect only "may carry" states to have a problem. If the decision is that states have no power to regulate this fundamental right at all, a breadth as you see in Roe v. Wade, then all state licensing systems have a problem.

I would expect a narrow decision, but I've been wrong before.

Last edited by zukiphile; November 4, 2021 at 12:44 PM.
zukiphile is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.01922 seconds with 8 queries