search
top

SAFE Act Upheld In Sloppy Lawsuit

Last week a judge of the New York Supreme Court held that the SAFE act was constitutional. This danger hit the news last year when both Schultz and NYSRPA were filing their suits against SAFE. It was run by a pro-se plaintiff who enjoys filing lawsuits for what he views as constitutional violations. These people are the greatest threats to our Second Amendment rights out there; even more than the anti-gunners. Robert Schultz quite possibly just lost for New Yorker’s any substantive right which they can claim against SAFE. The New York Rifle and Pistol Association suit is still in play, but existing bad precedent greatly complicates matters. You can read the opinion here:

The complaint and memoranda submitted by plaintiffs are unclear as to other bases for challenging the SAFE Act. For instance, in the complaint plaintiffs allege that the Safe Act arguably infringes on rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution and Civil Rights Law §4. Plaintiffs also assert that the statute arguably infringes on rights guaranteed by New York Constitution ArticleXII. However, Legislative enactments enjoy a strong presumption of constitutionality and while the presumption is rebuttable any invalidity must be demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt (Matter of McGee v Korman, 70 NY2d 225,231 [1987]). Here, plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate in what manner the SAFE Act infringes upon their asserted rights.

In other words, he failed to make his case. These things are really left up to professionals and experts, and not rank amateurs out to make a name for themselves or to stroke their own egos. I’m normally very amiable towards amateurs, but this the practice of law is not one of those cases.

7 Responses to “SAFE Act Upheld In Sloppy Lawsuit”

  1. Jacob says:

    Schultz filed his crackpot lawsuit knowing full well that the courts had repeatedly upheld the “message of necessity” many times before.

  2. A bad precedent hangs around like the smell of a rotting fish for years to come.

    The only reason the Peruta case turned out well is that his original lawyer copied a brief on a similar case from Alan Gura and the NRA took over the case before it could become a quagmire.

    The Robert Schultz’s and Leonard Embody’s of the world hurt Second Amendment rights as much as – if not more so – than Michael Bloomberg and his new partner in crime Shannon Watts.

  3. Windy Wilson says:

    The New York Supreme court? As I recall, the trial court level courts in New York State are called the Supreme Court. The top court, what is in the other states called the Supreme Court of XXX State is the Court of Appeal.
    In any rate, I don’t know what the procedural posture (as lawyers say) of this case is, but it kind of sounds like Schultz got his case booted either on the pleadings, with a demurrer/ motion to strike (without leave to amend his complaint to cure the defects, btw), or after some evidence was assembled in the case at the stage called Summary Judgment.
    Someone else can file suit, maybe even Schultz if he can write a complaint that works around the defects pointed out by the trial judge.
    This is not to contradict your statement that bad lawsuits are bad for the cause, but this outcome isn’t as bad as it could be, apart from the ability of an anti-liberty type to say, “The Supreme Court in New York upheld the SAFE Act”, and the ignorant believe him, and the ignorant, wanting to feel like they are on the winning team, don’t vote for liberty.

    • Matthew Carberry says:

      Yup, “a Supreme Court.” Though he’s apparently intending to double down on stupid to the Court of Appeals.

    • Jim Jones says:

      Correct. The NY “Supreme Court” is its trial level court.

  4. LanceLotLink says:

    The damage this case did is minimal. The Court pretty much said the case was mumbo jumbo. Gotta love this quote …

    in the absence of a cogent argument demonstrating how the SAFE
    ACT infringes upon their right, plaintiffs have failed to establish that the legislation is unconstitutional

    But I agree with Sebastian that pro se cases have a much greater chance of having a bad decision that other cases could use.

    Finally, Supreme Court is the trial level court for New York. Each of New York’s 62 counties has one Supreme Court, its the Supreme Court of the County, not the state.

  5. Dave says:

    This is the story of an idiot and too much free time. This guy should get together with Embody.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. SayUncle » Speaking of SAFE - […] Sloppy lawsuits make sloppy case law […]
top