Appearls court strikes down D.C "Good Cause" may-issue

Does this mean places like NY can't use the good cause clause to bar Conceal Carry?

So basically every state should become shall issue, now, or be taken to court?

>>34669174
Basically, it will end up like that. Either you allow open carry without concealed (not happening in liberal areas), shall issue a license for concealed and ban open (more likely), or just say fuck it and go full constitutional carry.

Essentially, you cannot restrict people from taking firearms out of their homes. You can restrict the manner and place at which they do it (restrict open or concealed, but not both. You can require a license but cannot make it may issue. You can restrict place of carry, like schools or court houses.).

>>34669174
>>34669153
>D.C. Appeals Court
>not knowing how the US legal system works at an even basic level
No, not until the USSC feels like hearing it and ruling in this decision's favor. Currently this only applies to D.C., but even then I hear there's some chance it might get re-examined at that level and possibly reversed (or not).

>>34669153
>>34669174
only applies to the DC circuit, aka only DC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_courts_of_appeals#Circuit_composition

>>34668924
Another constitution stepping foot cut off at the ankle. They should burn it to the fucking knee next time.

>>34669769
>>34670557
What is precedent?

>>34669153
>>34669174
>>34669207
>>34669769
>>34670557


While it's certainly possible the SCOTUS could take this up, it's far from the only situation where different circuits have different rules. OP's statement that:

>If they don't take the case, at the ery least DC will have its may issue brought down.

Is correct, but probably not something supreme court justices care that much about. The SCOTUS will deal with what it feels is most important first. To give you an idea how broad some of them are, here are the current ones on the Wikipedia entry:

>The Sixth Circuit and the Tenth Circuit disagree with regard to whether police may seize an individual, without a warrant, based solely on the officers' reasonable suspicion that the individual being seized committed a misdemeanor.[62]

>The Third Circuit, Fifth Circuit, and Ninth Circuit disagree with regard to whether the "special needs" exception permits warrantless strip searches of juveniles.[63]

>The Fifth Circuit and the Eleventh Circuit disagree with regard to whether prisoners have a reasonable expectation of privacy for correspondence with their attorney.[64]

>The First Circuit and the Fifth Circuit disagree with regard to the appellate standard of review for a trial court's determination of the scope of defendant's consent to search.[65]

Those shits have far broader-ranging consequences than what we're talking about here, and they've been festering since 2007, 2008, 2002, and 2007, respectively.