HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » NYC Liberal » Journal
Page: 1

NYC Liberal

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: New York
Home country: United States
Member since: Sun Aug 1, 2004, 01:28 PM
Number of posts: 19,783

Journal Archives

Concepcion v. US: Courts can consider intervening changes of law or fact to reduce sentences

Sotomayor, Thomas, Breyer, Kahan, and Gorsuch in the majority.

Kavanaugh dissents, joined by the Chief Justice, Alito and Barrett.

Concepcion is a case about whether, when a court is deciding whether to resentence a defendant under the First Step Act, which gives federal district courts power to resentence offenders in light of changes in the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, a district court must or may consider intervening developments, or whether such developments only come into play (if at all) after courts conclude that a sentence reduction is appropriate.

The Court holds that the First Step Act allows district courts to consider intervening changes of law or fact in exercising their discretion to reduce a sentence.


Thomas Jefferson on judges

You seem to consider the federal judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions, a very dangerous doctrine, indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.

Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have with others the same passions for the party, for power and the privilege of the corps. Their power is the more dangerous, as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control.

The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves.

— Letter to William Charles Jarvis (1820)

'Frightful in its scope': Hochul to call special session after SCOTUS gun decision

Source: Yahoo! News

NEW YORK — Gov. Kathy Hochul called a Supreme Court ruling striking down a strict New York gun law “frightful in its scope” on Thursday, as she warned the justices’ decision will “place millions of New Yorkers in harm’s way.”


“This decision isn’t just reckless. It’s reprehensible. It’s not what New Yorkers want,” Hochul said at a press conference in her Manhattan office shortly after the decision was handed down. “We do not need people entering our subways, our restaurants, our movie theaters with concealed weapons.”

Hochul said she is meeting with legislative leaders Thursday evening to pick dates for a special session, where the state will define “sensitive locations" where concealed carry can be banned. The session is expected to take place sometime in July, she said.


"We are also going to change the permitting process,” she said. “We are also going to create a higher threshold for those who want to receive a concealed carry permit. We are going to require training involved and also that they have specific firearm training, and I believe that we are going to be finding a way to create a system where the default position is for a private business that a concealed carry is not allowed unless they affirmatively offer the right to someone to come in with a concealed carry."

Read more: https://news.yahoo.com/frightful-scope-hochul-call-special-163233378.html

New York Tightens Its Strict Gun Laws in Democratic Show of Force

Source: NY Times

The State Legislature passed a broad package of gun bills that will raise the minimum age to buy a semiautomatic rifle to 21, ban most civilians from purchasing bullet-resistant body vests and revise the state’s so-called red flag laws, making New York the first state to approve legislation following shootings in Buffalo and Texas that left a total of 31 dead.

Lawmakers approved bills to broaden abortion protections and bolster voting rights, using the final hours of the 2022 legislative session to deliver the most robust response yet by a state in the face of federal gridlock.

Faced with a looming Supreme Court decision that could strike down Roe v. Wade, Democratic legislative leaders were fully behind a bill package aimed at protecting abortion service providers from legal or professional backlash, among other things.

Legislators also approved new measures to combat voter suppression under the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York, invoking the former congressman and civil rights leader in a nod to the voting rights bill that failed to pass in Congress.

Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/02/nyregion/guns-abortion-laws-ny.html
Go to Page: 1