Knife Rights Will Appeal NY "Gravity Knife" Case To SCOTUS

Knife Rights has announced that they will appeal their long-running case against New York over the definition of gravity knives to the Supreme Court. The case centers around common folding knives that have been the target of enforcement by the NYPD and the Manhattan District Attorney. The victims of this unjust definition have usually been trades people and minorities.

From Knife Rights on their plan to appeal:

Knife Rights' NYC Gravity Knife Case Appeal Headed To U.S. Supreme Court

Knife Rights is going forward with an appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States of the Second Circuit's decision in favor of New York City and District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. in our long running civil rights lawsuit over their persecution of pocket knife owners.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg last week granted us a 60-day extension until January 13th, 2019, for submission of our petition for a writ of certiorari asking the Court to hear our appeal.

While our lawsuit against New York City and DA Vance centers on their abusive enforcement of New York State's gravity knife ban against owners of common pocket knives, the focus changes somewhat as it moves to the Supreme Court. Keep in mind that the Supreme Court does not generally agree to hear a case just because any particular decision in a case is unjust, irrational or just plain terrible, all of which describe this ruling in spades.

Beyond settling major constitutional issues, the Court will sometimes choose to resolve differences in the application of Federal law among different Federal circuit courts when its decisions are not applied the same throughout the U.S. The Second Circuit panel's ruling regarding our constitutional vagueness claim in this case opens up that possibility with starkly split decisions between it and other circuits, as well as splits between a number of state courts. The writ explains why this case is important and worthy of the Court's limited time.

A Supreme Court decision to hear the case could affect the implementation and enforcement of a wide spectrum of laws to persons throughout the U.S. It is no longer just about these common folding knives. New York City's enforcement of the state's gravity knife law against common folding knives is now the vehicle to answer the bigger constitutional question at issue. Only if the Supreme Court accepts the case do we get to argue the merits of our particular case as it reflects this bigger issue.

It's always long odds for any case to be accepted by the Supreme Court. However, not making the attempt ensures we lose. And, that would allow very bad precedent to be set in stone.

Taking a case to Supreme Court is an expensive proposition, more so for a small organization like Knife Rights. We still need to raise significant funds for this effort if we don't want to hand a victory to New York Governor Cuomo, DA Vance andr New York City Mayor de Blasio

Please consider a year-end TAX-DEDUCTIBLE donation to Knife Rights to support our efforts at the Supreme Court.  Donate at:  www.kniferights.org/donate/foundation

When, Oh When, Will The SCOTUS Actually Defend The Second Amendment Again?

I am disappointed in the US Supreme Court. That's nothing new for either me or most people regardless of their political leanings.

My disappointment stems from the absolute refusal by the Court to hear any and all Second Amendment cases since 2010 when they ruled in McDonald v. Chicago. The latest case to bite the dust is the Maryland case of Kolbe et al v. Hogan et al which challenged that state's ban on ARs, AKs, and standard capacity magazines.

From the Orders released today:

17-127 KOLBE, STEPHEN V., ET AL. V. HOGAN, GOV. OF MD, ET AL.

The motion of Edwin Vieira, Jr., et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae is granted. The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.

This case was a loss at the District Court level with an absolutely ridiculous opinion by Judge Catherine C. Blake which was then followed by a 2-1 win in the 4th Circuit that got overturned by an en banc ruling affirming the District Court.

If it is true that President Trump will have the ability to appoint up to 40% of the Federal bench with conservative judges, it can't come soon enough. Moreover, I hope they aren't in the mold of Judge Harvey Wilkinson either.

Support For Kachalsky Petition From States

Attorney Generals from 20 states have filed an amicus brief in support of the Second Amendment Foundation's petition for a Writ of Certiorari before the US Supreme Court. This brief is in addition to supporting briefs from the NRA, the Cato Institute, and others.

BELLEVUE, WA - Twenty state attorneys general have filed an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in support of the Second Amendment Foundation's petition for a Writ of Certiorari in a case challenging New York's gun permitting statute, along with several other interested parties that have filed their own briefs.

The case is known as Kachalsky v. Cacace and was argued before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. SAF is represented by attorney Alan Gura, who won both the Heller and McDonald Second Amendment cases before the Supreme Court.

"We are delighted at the support being shown by attorneys general in Alaska, Alabama, Florida, Oklahoma, Nebraska, New Mexico and 13 other states, and particularly for the leadership of Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli in bringing them all together," said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. "This case is all about an individual's right to carry a firearm outside the home for personal protection, and it is gratifying to see so much support."

In addition to the brief filed by the attorneys general, supporting amicus briefs have also been filed by the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence represented by former Attorney General Edwin Meese III, the National Rifle Association represented by former Solicitor General Paul D. Clement, plus the American Civil Rights Union, Academics for the Second Amendment, Cato Institute, the Second Amendment Preservation Association, New Jersey Second Amendment Society and Commonwealth Second Amendment, Inc.

"This is an important case," Gottlieb said, "and that's why so many parties are interested and supportive of our issue."

SAF and the five individual plaintiffs are challenging whether the state can arbitrarily restrict the Second Amendment right to bear arms outside the home by requiring people to prove a special need to the satisfaction of a government official.

"Our case is about equal protection and the arbitrary authority of government officials to essentially decide on a whim whether average citizens can have the means of self-defense outside the confines of their home," Gottlieb said. "Most crimes happen away from the home, and it is in public places and on public streets where a citizen is most likely to encounter a life-threatening situation where he or she might have to defend themselves."

UPDATE: Dave Hardy of the Of Arms and the Law blog has links to all the pro-Kachalsky amicus briefs. You can find them here.