Thomas penned a 19-page dissent on the Court’s denial of certiorari–most of which was joined by Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Justice Thomas slammed the Court for its refusal to consider an appeal in Rogers v. Grewal. Thomas had hoped to use the case to set the country straight about just what the Second Amendment means — and since he won’t get the chance to do so as part
The Supreme Court on Monday decided that it would not hear appeals in 10 gun rights cases. Second Amendment enthusiasts are livid – but perhaps none quite as much as Justice Clarence Thomas. He penned a 19-page dissent on the Court’s denial of certiorari–most of which was joined by Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Justice Thomas slammed the Court for its refusal to consider an appeal in Rogers v. Grewal. Thomas had hoped to use the case to set the country straight about just what the Second Amendment means — and since he won’t get the chance to do so as part of a decision, he’s determined to do it in a way which carries zero weight.
The facts in Rogers v. Grewal are a right-wing fantasy: a law-abiding New Jersey businessman applies for a permit to carry a handgun. He services ATM machines in high-crime areas and wants to protect himself from threats of violence. Plus, he’s been the victim of crime before, so he’s a little extra on-guard. Sure, what could go wrong?
New Jersey law requires that a private citizen show some kind of “justifiable need” to obtain a carry permit; that need must be specified in detail in a permit application that lays out “specific threats or previous attacks which demonstrate a special danger to the applicant’s life that cannot be avoided by means other than by issuance of a permit to carry a handgun.” In Jersey, it’s not enough that you want to carry a gun – you have to actually need it.
The man, Thomas Rogers, helpfully joined by the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, sued and took his permit denial all the way to the Supreme Court – which has now refused to consider the case. An annoyed Justice Thomas chastised his colleagues for their unwillingness to revisit the handgun issue:
In Thomas’s tirade against the majority, he called New Jersey’s requirement that a person actually need to carry a gun a “near-total prohibition,” and then raised some truly maddening arguments.
