Welcome to M1911.ORG
The M1911 Pistols Organization Forums Site


Dear members,
Please make sure the email address we have for you, is correct and valid.


Sponsors Panel
If you intend to buy something from the companies advertising above, or near the bottom of our pages, please use their banners in our sites. Whatever you buy from them, using those banners, gives us a small commission, which helps us keep these sites alive. You still pay the normal price, our commission comes from their profit, so you have nothing to lose, while we have something to gain. Your help is appreciated.
If you want to become a sponsor and see your banner in the above panel, click here to contact us.

Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: An interesting SCOTUS decision

  1. #1
    Join Date
    2nd June 2004
    Location
    Terra
    Posts
    22,026
    Posts liked by others
    791

    An interesting SCOTUS decision

    The Supreme Court has just ruled in a potentially significant 4th Amendment case that also peripherally involved firearms. The case originated in Rhode Island; the name of the case is Caniglia v. Strom, et al.

    The back story is that a man had an argument with his wife. She left the house and spent the night elsewhere, and in the morning she called the cops and asked for a welfare check because she was concerned that her husband might be suicidal. When the cops got there the guy did not appear to be suicidal but they persuaded him to go to a mental health clinic to be checked out.

    While he was doing that, the cops lied to the wife and told her that her husband had given his permission for them to take his firearms. On the basis of that lie, the wife allowed them to enter the house and take two handguns. The guy was cleared by the mental health clinic, but the police refused to return his guns, so he sued. Two lower courts ruled against him, and it eventually made it to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled -- by a 9-0 vote -- that the police did NOT have a right to enter the home or to seize the man's property.

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinion...0-157_8mjp.pdf
    Hawkmoon
    On a good day, can hit the broad side of a barn ... from the inside
    Likes (3) :
    Doran (19th May 2021), John (18th May 2021), Rick McC. (19th May 2021)

    Last edited by Hawkmoon; 18th May 2021 at 09:34.


  2. #2
    Join Date
    4th June 2004
    Posts
    2,685
    Posts liked by others
    138
    Might affect a lot of past confiscation cases.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    3rd September 2018
    Location
    Modesto, Ca.
    Posts
    232
    Posts liked by others
    77
    The key to this 9-0 decision might be the false statement to the wife that her husband had granted them permission to enter. That's probably why the decision was 9-0.
    i sold all my handguns. . . . . . . . . . except for the 1911 style pistols in .45 ACP.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    26th December 2015
    Location
    near Annapolis Maryland
    Posts
    121
    Posts liked by others
    19
    9-0 is usually a message to lower courts that they messed up
    Likes (1) :
    MuyModesto (21st May 2021)



  5. #5
    Join Date
    2nd June 2004
    Location
    Terra
    Posts
    22,026
    Posts liked by others
    791
    Decent follow-up article in Forbes:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksib...h=fa9161e2829f
    Hawkmoon
    On a good day, can hit the broad side of a barn ... from the inside
    Likes (1) :
    MuyModesto (22nd May 2021)


  6. #6
    Join Date
    26th December 2015
    Location
    near Annapolis Maryland
    Posts
    121
    Posts liked by others
    19
    Some details: IOWA, LOUISIANA, MINNESOTA, MONTANA, OKLAHOMA, SOUTH CAROLINA, SOUTH DAKOTA, TEXAS, AND UTAH along with the feds filed briefs in favor of Rhode Island's side




    the community caretaking exception was designed for cases involving impounded cars and highway safety, on the grounds that police are often called to car accidents to remove nuisances like inoperable vehicles on public roads.
    Holding: Neither the holding nor logic of Cady v. Dombrowski [the case that started the "community caretaking exception"] justifies the removal of Edward Caniglia’s firearms from his home by police officers under a “community caretaking exception” to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    2nd June 2004
    Location
    Terra
    Posts
    22,026
    Posts liked by others
    791
    It is disappointing that most of the states that supported the Rhode Island position are what we generally think of as conservative states. That said, most states' attorneys general tend to be supportive of their state police, so I suppose it should not be a surprise that they filed briefs supporting the police. Perhaps more surprising is that none of the northeatern states surrounding Rhode Island filed to support their position.
    Hawkmoon
    On a good day, can hit the broad side of a barn ... from the inside
    Likes (1) :
    Mark75H (22nd May 2021)


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  



Sponsors Panel
If you intend to buy something from Brownells, please use their banners above. Whatever you buy from them, gives us a small commission, which helps us keep these sites alive. You still pay the normal price, our commission comes from their profit, so you have nothing to lose, while we have something to gain. Your help is appreciated.
If you want to become a sponsor and see your banner in the above panel, click here to contact us.

Non-gun-related supporters.
Thank you for visiting our supporters.