The case indicates a new interest in the 2nd Amendment by the Supreme Court

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court is turning to gun rights for the first time in almost a decade, despite the fact that those who presented the case, the gun owners of New York City, have already gained changes in regulation They contested. The persistence of the judges in hearing the arguments on Monday despite the city's action has caused gun control advocates to fear that the conservative majority of the court can use the case to question gun restrictions across the country . The arms rights groups expect the higher court to be about to extend its historic rulings of 2008 and 2010 that enshrined the right to have a weapon to defend themselves at home. For years, the National Rifle Association and its allies had tried to make the court say more about gun rights, even though mass shootings may have caused judges to avoid taking on new disputes over gun limits. Judge Clarence Thomas has been among the members of the court who have complained that the lower courts are treating the right of the Second Amendment to maintain and bear arms as a second class right. The lawsuit in New York began as a challenge to the city's ban on carrying a licensed gun, closed and unloaded outside the city limits, either to a shooting range or a second home. The lower courts ratified the regulation, but the decision of the Supreme Court in January to intervene in the case signaled a revived interest in the weapons rights of a court with two new judges, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, both appointed by President Donald Trump Officials, both at the city and state level, rushed to find a way to get the case out of the reach of the judges. The city not only changed its regulation to allow licensed gun owners to transport their weapons to locations outside the five boroughs of New York, but the state enacted a law prohibiting cities from imposing contested restrictions. There is no case or controversy because New York City has repealed the ordinance and the New York State Legislature has acted to ensure that it remains repealed, said Jonathan Lowy, lead attorney and vice president of the legal action project of the control group of Brady weapons But those measures failed to get the court to dismiss the case, although the judges are likely to ask the arguments if they have anything left to decide. Paul Clement, who represents three New York residents and the New York National Rifle Association member who is challenging the transportation ban, said in an email that among the reasons why the case is still legally alive is that the The court disapproves of tactical movements of the type employed by the city and declares that they are intended to thwart the review of a problem by the judges. In addition, he wrote, the City still sees the possession of firearms as a privilege and not a fundamental right and is still in the business of limiting transportation and denying licenses for a large number of discretionary reasons. In case the court reaches the bottom of the law, the city claims that what its previous rule calls did not violate the Constitution. But that seems to be a difficult sale given the composition of the court, with Gorsuch and, in particular, Kavanaugh on the court. Kavanaugh voted at odds when his federal court of appeals confirmed the District of Columbia's ban on semi-automatic rifles. Weapons bans and gun regulations that are not old or sufficiently entrenched in the text, history and tradition are not consistent with the individual law of the Second Amendment, Kavanaugh wrote in 2011. Arms control advocates fear that the court may adopt Kavanaugh's legal justification, potentially endangering regulations on who can carry weapons in public, limits on large-capacity ammunition magazines and perhaps even restrictions on Possession of weapons by convicted criminals, including persons convicted of domestic violence. . This Second Amendment approach would treat gun rights as an absolute right, frozen in history, and not subject to any restrictions such as public safety demands, said Hannah Shearer, litigation director at the Giffords Law Center to prevent armed violence Reflecting possible high stakes, more than three dozen legal supporting documents have been submitted. The Trump administration, 25 primarily Republican states and 120 members of the House of Representatives are on the side of gun owners. A dozen states led by Democrats and 139 House legislators support the city. In addition, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, DR.I., a vocal critic of the court, presented a brief accompanied by four Senate Democratic colleagues who asked the judges to dismiss the case and resist being dragged into what he called A political project Whitehouse also included a warning to the judges. “The Supreme Court is not well. And people know it. Perhaps the Court can heal itself before the public demands that it be restructured to reduce the influence of the policy, he wrote, citing a public opinion poll that shows its support for such changes. The 53 Republican senators responded with a letter urging the court not to be intimidated by the threats of the Democrats. A decision is expected at the end of June. This story has not been edited by The Times of India and is automatically generated from a syndicated feed to which we subscribe. (This story has not been edited by and is automatically generated from a syndicated feed to which we subscribe.)