United States v. Loiseau

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that “the scope of the Second Amendment right in Heller does not extend to invalidate regulations ... on carrying handguns”
• finding that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine did not apply where the plaintiff did not challenge the state court’s decision but rather targeted the constitutionality of a New York Penal Law provision
• finding that a New York law banning handgun possession outside of the home without a showing of “a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community” fell outside the scope of the Second Amendment (internal quotation marks omitted)
• upholding licensing law requiring a showing of “articulable need for self-defense” to openly carry and completely prohibiting concealed carry
• rejecting the claim that the plaintiffs must submit new applications for a handgun permit post- McDonald , 561 U.S. 742 , 130 S.Ct. 3020 , to have standing, because it would be futile given the state law that was the basis for the original denial of permit had not changed
• substantial interest in regulated concealed and open carry

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).