ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — Just in time for Christmas, New York legislators returned to the state capital Thursday to give themselves a nice holiday gift: a pay raise that would make them the nation’s best-paid state lawmakers.

Members of the state Assembly and Senate would make a base salary of $142,000 under a bill they passed during a special session, a 29% raise over their salary of $110,000.

That would send them racing ahead of state lawmakers in California, who are now the nation’s best-paid legislators with a yearly base pay of about $119,000, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Bill would give New York the nation’s best-paid legislature (ny1.com)

And that does not include bribes, kickbacks and stock tips. And now you know why Liberal states legislate the way they do: The Constitution does not pay cash.

After the Bruen decision, New York Governor Kathy Hochul sighed the most restrictive concealed carry bill into law.  It effectively turned New York into a gun free zone, banning concealed carry in all public places and private places that did not post explicit permission to carry.

The Governor made this statement about the law:

“In response to the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down New York’s century-old concealed carry law, we took swift and thoughtful action to keep New Yorkers safe,” Governor Hochul said. “I refuse to surrender my right as Governor to protect New Yorkers from gun violence or any other form of harm. In New York State, we will continue leading the way forward and implementing common sense gun safety legislation.”

Even while a judge has halted several provisions of this law after a number of suits have been filed, the State of New Jersey just passed an even more restrictive gun law, A4769.

This is the New Jersey Governor’s statement:

“What kind of state do we want to be? Do we want to be like Mississippi or Alabama, whose firearm death rates are nearly five times ours, or do we want to remain a state where people can actually be and feel safe?” Murphy said at a bill signing event flanked by gun control advocates in red “Moms Demand Action” shirts. “This law ensures that no matter what Washington might throw at us, we will keep doing everything we can to ensure the safety of our citizens.”

It’s clear, from their own admissions, that they passed these laws explicitly to do a run around the Bruen decision.  They want to deny citizens the right to carry and they will write their laws in such as way as to deny citizens their constitutional rights while maliciously complying with the strictest language of Bruen.

The Supreme Court made it clear that it believed the Second Amendment meant the right to bear Arms in public and these states gave the Court and their citizens a big middle finger.

It is a shame how the Supreme Court is treated as a second class branch of a co-equal branch of government.  States regularly try to weasel out of complying with Court decisions.  Especially Blue states when it comes to gun rights decisions.

Since I’m no longer a Conservative, I am ready for some authoritarianism on behalf of the Court.

When the Court establishes a right, like the right to carry concealed, and a state instantly comes up with a law explicitly to counter the Court’s decision, arrest the state government for contempt of Court.

The idea of the states as laboratories of democracy doesn’t give them the right to violate the Constitution. That’s established in the United States.

That needs to be enforced.

New York and New Jersey need to be punished for this in a meaningful way that sends a message “you don’t get to runaround the Supreme Court and the Bill of Rights.”

Who else is sick of the overwhelming idiotic holiday behavior of people? You have been an asshole or a shithead all year long and suddenly I am to believe you are the physical presence of a Hallmark movie secondary character?

This is funny because it is true.

At the same time, I am all Holyday-dy because the missus says so and I am not the one who want to wear the tree where the sun don’t shine.

I do believe that at least one reader has seen this happening in real life.

That would kill any husband.

And if you solved this problem mathematically rather than tactically, you must be new to this blog.

And finally:

BBQ & Smoking post to return!

Just a few minutes ago.

One of the things I had to get programmed in my head was the concept of water pipes freezing. My BiL is a plumber and he told me to keep small heaters strategically placed in a couple of locations where the waters flows, including the crawlspace.

The idea of getting out in the freezing weather to plug and unplug the heaters was not very appealing to me, so last winter I added Cold Weather Thermostatically Controlled Outlets to the devices. Truthfully I never found out if they clicked in or not because the really cold spell did not last that long and temps at the heater locations apparently did not drop enough to activated them.

But today? Holy crap, you can see it did go down enough to freeze the sun. I donned my cold clothes and went to check on the heaters: Working like charm (Yes, I figured they were working before ’cause the water was running).

One small but important detail: Make sure the load of your heaters does not overwhelm the outlet. This one is rated for a max of 1,200 Watts and thankfully the heaters I use come with a setting at 750 W which is more than enough to keep the pipes from “popsicling”.

The high for today is going to be just 13 degrees, but since it is my day off, we are planning on do nothing but binge Jack Ryan and get fat.

And you guys, stay safe and warm.

Merry Christmas to you all!

If you know somebody that is alone this Christmas season, make sure you reach out to them to let them know that they are not truly alone.

For those serving that are away this Christmas season, I wish you safe travels and hope you find you way home soon.

We have a number of suggestions, I’m going to go through my inbox again this weekend and move them all into my keep so that they are right there when I go to right. Thank you.

We also have an article from a reader/contributor that needs to be published. My responsibility, I’ll attempt to get that out soon.

Is there any articles you particularly enjoyed this week? Is there any particular subject that needed more attention?

On a personal query, did anybody besides me read my long article How States are arguing 2A cases post Bruen? Did it meet your expectations?

We’ve been following a couple of cases in NY state regarding their CCIA law(s) where the state immediately post Bruen created a set of requirements that turned NYS from “May Issue” to “Shall Issue, but you can’t carry anywhere”.

This case was first heard by United States District Judge Glenn T. Suddaby. Judge Suddaby said that the CCIA looked bad to him but that the people suing in the lawsuit did not have standing.

GOA et all went back and got more plaintiffs to join in the suit and refiled. The state attempted to have the case assigned to a different judge. Judge Suddaby said “NO”. Took the case back.

The plaintiffs requested a temporary injunction to block the CCIA. Judge Suddaby granted the temporary injunction but held it for three days for the state to appeal. The second circuit court vacated the temporary injunction.

A short time later Judge Suddaby granted an injunction blocking parts of the CCIA. This time he did NOT hold it to allow the state to appeal.

An injunction is granted when the judge feels that the case will win on the merits. I.e. there is no evidence that needs to be presented in order for the person requesting the injunction to win.

The state, as expected, appealed to the second circuit which again overturned Judge Suddaby’s injunction.

At this point no more progress can be made on the case until the second circuit court hears the appeal. This could be next week or it could be next year or it could be years from now. It is a good bet that the second circuit would love to push it out as far as possible.

At this point the GOA threw a monkey wrench into the shinagagins of the second circuit and the state of New York.

TO THE HONORABLE SONIA SOTOMAYOR, ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES AND CIRCUIT JUSTICE FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT:

Without providing any analysis or explanation, the Second Circuit has stayed a preliminary injunction issued by a federal district court in New York that was carefully designed to limit New York’s enforcement of a sweeping gun control statute, enacted as retaliation against New York gun owners for having prevailed in this Court’s decision in N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 142 S. Ct. 2111 (2022). The district court’s injunction was supported by a detailed 184-page opinion, meticulously tailored to follow this Court’s framework established in Bruen. In contrast, the Second Circuit’s stay pending appeal was issued based only on a single conclusory assertion, yet with the effect of indefinitely suspending the protections afforded New Yorkers by the Second Amendment and affirmed by this Court in Bruen. The Second Circuit’s stay should be vacated in order to uphold the right of New Yorkers to keep and bear arms, as well as to vindicate the authority of this Court over the circuit courts.

his Court’s Opinion in Bruen was issued on June 23, 2022. Only hours later,
New York Governor Hochul promised to “fight back”:

We just received some disturbing news … the Supreme Court … has stripped away the State of New York’s right and responsibility to protect its citizens … with a decision … which is frightful in its scope of how they are setting back this nation…. This decision is not just reckless, it’s reprehensible. It’s not what New Yorkers want, and we should have the right of … what we want to do in terms of gun laws in our state…. [O]ur governor has a moral responsibility to do what we can … because of what is going on, the insanity of the gun culture that has now possessed everyone up to the Supreme Court…. We’ve been ready for this … We’ve been working with a team of legal experts … I’m prepared to call the legislature back into session… We are not going to cede our rights that easily, despite the best efforts of the politicized Supreme Court…. No longer can we strike the balance… Shocking. They have taken away our rights…. This is New York. We don’t back down. We fight back…. I’m prepared to go back to muskets…. We’re just getting started here.

Just eight days later on July 1, 2022, the New York Legislature responded to Governor Hochul’s call to defy this Court’s authority and resist Bruen’s protection of Second Amendment rights, enacting the Concealed Carry Improvement Act (“CCIA”). After extensive briefing, a hearing, and oral argument, the district court enjoined portions of the CCIA in a 184-page opinion. Shortly thereafter the Second Circuit, without providing any reasoning or analysis, granted New York’s request first for a temporary administrative stay, and then a stay pending appeal, allowing New York’s repudiation of Bruen back into effect without so much as a brief explanation.

First, without providing any analysis of the factors for determining whether a stay is warranted, the panel nakedly asserted that it had “weighed the applicable factors … and … upon due consideration … conclude[d] that a stay pending appeal is warranted.” App.002a. Tellingly, the Second Circuit did not take issue with a single factual finding or legal conclusion from the district court’s well-reasoned 184-page opinion. Nor did the Second Circuit claim that the district court had abused its discretion or otherwise erred in any part of its opinion granting Applicants preliminary relief. The Second Circuit’s unexplained and unsupported order deprives Applicants of the “careful review and a meaningful decision” to which they are “entitle[d].” Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 427 (2009).

The CCIA stands in direct defiance to Bruen’s central holding that governments cannot keep “ordinary, law-abiding citizen[s]” with “ordinary self-defense needs from carrying arms in public for that purpose.” Bruen at 2150. The Second Circuit’s stay of the district court’s preliminary injunction allows New York’s novel, anti-Bruen law to strip New Yorkers of their right to keep and bear arms in a sweeping and unprecedented way, along with the collateral damage of violating multiple other constitutional provisions. Applicants, along with countless others like them, are being irreparably harmed each day this patently unconstitutional law remains in place, eviscerating the right of ordinary, law-abiding New Yorkers to carry firearms in public for self-defense. Additionally, this case presents issues of national importance with respect to states that enact laws in explicit defiance of this Court’s decisions.

Nor does the district court’s opinion represent an outlier, as its decision is not the only one striking down portions of the CCIA as unconstitutional. Rather, there have been a total of three opinions issued by district courts in New York concluding that various aspects of the CCIA are unconstitutional. Yet as in this case, the Second Circuit has granted stays pending appeal in those other cases as well – again, without providing any reasoning or analysis. See Christian, et al. v. Nigrelli, et al. (2d Cir. 22-2987, Document 40); Hardaway, et al. v. Nigrelli, et al. (2d Cir. 22-2933, Document 53). One might think that the Second Circuit – being the circuit whose opinion was recently reversed by this Court in Bruen (N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Beach, 818 Fed. Appx. 99 (2d Cir. 2020)) – might find it appropriate to at least provide some basis for its decision to stay multiple lower court decisions which have faithfully applied the Bruen framework. But one would be wrong.

This Court should vacate the Second Circuit’s unreasoned, knee-jerk order granting a stay pending appeal.

This is addressed to Justice Sotomayor because she is the judge assigned to oversee the second circuit court. This will not be seen by just her but by all of the justices.

The second circuit court issuing a “stay pending appeal” is what got them in trouble. I believe that this renders any decision by Judge Suddaby moot pending that appeal being heard by the second circuit. Because the Supreme Court has ruled on multiple occasions that “a right delayed is a right denied” this appeal to SCOTUS is likely to be noticed and acted upon.

Of interest, there is no need for oral arguments or anything else on this sort of appeal. The Supreme Court can issue their decision on this request at anytime. Like tomorrow, if they want to.

Related proceedings are:

• Antonyuk v. Hochul, No. 1:22-CV-0986 (GTS/CFH), 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 201944 (N.D.N.Y. Nov. 7, 2022) (order granting preliminary injunction).
• Antonyuk v. Hochul, No. 22-2908 (2d Cir. Dec. 7, 2022) (order staying preliminary injunction).

EMERGENCY APPLICATION FOR IMMEDIATE ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF AND TO VACATE STAY OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ISSUED BY THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

This Tweet has gone viral and caught a lot of hate.

https://twitter.com/JacobAShell/status/1604872083799842816?s=19

Jacob here is 100% right.

Unfortunately, almost all of the replies are 100% wrong.

Exempli gratia:

If your parents were flying the whole family to Europe for vacations you weren't middle-class. You were UPPER-upper-middle class, or more probably lower-UPPER class. Let's have some realism here, please. Middle class *might* manage short road trips in the summer, but no more.

— Brad R. Torgersen (@BradRTorgersen) December 22, 2022

Someone explain to me exactly what the fucking purpose of Brad’s response other than some bullshit gatekeeping.

So the fuck what if Jacob was UPPER middle-class or regular middle-class?  Doesit diminish his point at all?

I understand exactly where Jacob is coming from.

He got very close you describing my childhood.

My father was a lawyer in a small firm (about 10 employees total).  My mother was a nurse.

We had a 3 bed/3 bath house, my dad drove a Chevy Suburban, my mom drove a minivan.

We road tripped to my grandparent’s house twice a year, summer and Christmas.  I never went overseas, but did vacation in Canada once.

That was the lifestyle of all my friends.  They had parents who were civil engineers, architects, accountants, one was a therapist, another was a dentist.

The federal government defines middle-class as single earners between $45,000 and $130,000 per year, family income between $65,000 and $250,000 per year.

I grew up towards the higher end of that range, but definitely within it.

We were solidly in the “professional white collar middle-class.”

Today I’m an engineer and my wife is a librarian.  Again, solidly white collar professional middle-class.  I make about the same on paper as my dad did.

Adjusted for inflation, my buying power is half of what his was in the 90s.

To buy a 3bd/3br house in California, South Florida, New England, Chicago, any major metropolitan area if going to start at half a million dollars and go up rapidly from there.

My parents bought the house I grew up in for $300K in 1995.  It just sold for $1.2M.

I can’t afford my childhood home making the same salary as my dad.

To have the lifestyle I had growing up in the same city I grew up in I’d need to make a solid $500K.

What Jacob describes is the quintessential American Dream.

A decent house, two cars, enough disposable income to enjoy the occasional vacation.

And depending on where you live, that can be utterly impossible to have in the income range we call middle-class.

When it costs me $1,000 to fill my heating oil tank, there goes my budget for a road trip to grandma’s.

And yet the overwhelming response has been effectively “fuck you rich kid, you’re not middle-class.”

How the fuck does that help?

The response should be “hey you fuckers in DC, why the fuck is the American Dream priced our of the hands of the middle-class?”

The response I’m seeing is nothing more than the petty mean girl envy from people who grew up towards the lower end of the middle-class range.

It’s ugly and it’s counter productive.

Let me put it to you this way.

Nearly 100% of people who work for a living, regardless of where in the middle-class range they are, could say with complete accuracy:

“I make the same income as my parents did but to have the same buying power and quality of life as they did I would have to make double what they did.”

But no.  People are too focused on telling a guy why he grew up too rich to have an opinion about middle-class lifestyles.

Guess what.  It’s okay to have empathy for someone who grew up with more money than you did, and if his Tweet makes you angry, ask yourself why and who should you be angry at.

This guy because you’re envious of his childhood, which accomplishes nothing?

Or the people in charge who made the American Dream unaffordable?