1 step closer to national reciprocity...

[Ring]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u40CPG021Xk
Your constitutional right doesn't end because you crossed a line on the map...

Case is Commonwealth of Massachusetts v Dean F. Donnell, opinion is dated 8/3/23 by judge John F Coffey, listed in the last page as Associate Justice. Appears to come out of Middlesex MA

The winning argument appears to be based on Bruen. Reconstructing it as best I can from the judges order, defense argued that there is no text history or tradition of barring people from defensive arms in one state merely because they come from another state. I don't see any evidence that my three other favorite arguments were used:

Making somebody get somewhere around 18 permits total to get national carry rights violates the bans on excessive fees and excessive delays in the access to carry rights found at Bruen footnote 9. It absolutely detonates those bans.

Saenz v Roe 1999 (US Supreme Court) bans states from discriminating against visiting residents of other states. (This would not be an issue in Massachusetts regardless because it is possible for somebody from New Hampshire or another state like mine in Alabama to obtain a Massachusetts carry permit.)

The MA permit processes still contain subjective elements such as letters of reference banned in Bruen footnote 9 via the citation to Shuttlesworth v Birmingham 1969. In other words, if this guy would have been forced to jump through banned subjective hoops to carry in MA, he was under no obligation to do that. The proof is in the Shuttlesworth case itself; the Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth was legally required to get a permit for a demonstration (a constitutional right) involving subjective standards; he didn't get the permit, ran the protest anyway, was criminally charged and convicted in State Court and then the US Supreme Court cleared him of all charges because everything that happened to him was unconstitutional: subjective standards when accessing to a basic civil right are absolutely forbidden in that 1969 case.

[EricTheBald]

Don’t forget the “Full Faith & Credit” clause.

I fail to see how a marriage or driver’s license is valid nationwide, while a carry license isn’t.

[BB62]

Don’t forget the “Full Faith & Credit” clause.

I fail to see how a marriage or driver’s license is valid nationwide, while a carry license isn’t.

Not the USSC has weighed in on the matter yet, but you're comparing apples & oranges.

The RKBA is a constitutional *right* - the others aren't. Is the First Amendment reciprocal? How about the Fourth Amendment?

The number of victim zones, as well as the number of circumstances in which a license is required ought to be near zero.

Here's the ruling: https://www.docdroid.net/524o4XV/opinio ... onnell-pdf

[EricTheBald]

... but you're comparing apples & oranges.

The RKBA is a constitutional *right* - the others aren't.

LOL, yes... I know.
That's exactly the point I was making.

[M-Quigley]

Don’t forget the “Full Faith & Credit” clause.

I fail to see how a marriage or driver’s license is valid nationwide, while a carry license isn’t.

I tried to find a search online about why DL's are accepted nationwide, either a federal law or a court decision, and came up empty. I did find out that some states didn't even license their drivers until the 1950's. I did however find this.

https://www.fortmyersbeachtalk.com/2023 ... ecognized/

Certain classes of driver licenses Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Rhode Island and Vermont are no longer valid in Florida.

The Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles has published a list of out-of-state license classes that are invalid as of July 1 in accordance with Senate Bill 1718.

Each of the five states has classes of licenses that are invalid, including “limited purpose driver’s license,” “limited purpose instruction permit,” “limited purpose provisional driver’s license” and “not valid for use for official federal purposes” for Hawaii.

The bill specifically prohibits the issuance of a driver’s license to anyone who does not provide proof of lawful presence in the U.S.

“Someone who is in our country illegally and has violated our laws should not possess a government-issued ID which allows them access to state-funded services and other privileges afforded to lawful residents,” Gov. Ron DeSantis said in a prepared statement this week. “The Biden administration may continue to abdicate its responsibilities to secure our border, but Florida will stand for the rule of law. Even if the federal government refuses, Florida will act decisively to protect our citizens, our state, and our country.”

[JustaShooter]

I tried to find a search online about why DL's are accepted nationwide, either a federal law or a court decision, and came up empty.

It's called the Driver's License Agreement, and was written by the Joint Executive Board of the Driver License Compact (a data sharing agreement):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver_License_Agreement

[M-Quigley]

I tried to find a search online about why DL's are accepted nationwide, either a federal law or a court decision, and came up empty.

It's called the Driver's License Agreement, and was written by the Joint Executive Board of the Driver License Compact (a data sharing agreement):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver_License_Agreement

Great, thanks, not sure why it didn't come up for me, wrong keywords perhaps. I know it's off topic but since I mentioned Florida (and since some states might choose to ignore any federal bill passed r/t CC) how does Florida get away with not accepting certain licenses?

[schmieg]

I tried to find a search online about why DL's are accepted nationwide, either a federal law or a court decision, and came up empty.

It's called the Driver's License Agreement, and was written by the Joint Executive Board of the Driver License Compact (a data sharing agreement):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver_License_Agreement

Great, thanks, not sure why it didn't come up for me, wrong keywords perhaps. I know it's off topic but since I mentioned Florida (and since some states might choose to ignore any federal bill passed r/t CC) how does Florida get away with not accepting certain licenses?

Because the Supreme Court has not yet expanded the Second Amendment to include concealed carry as a right imposed upon the States by the 14th Amendment.

[M-Quigley]

It's called the Driver's License Agreement, and was written by the Joint Executive Board of the Driver License Compact (a data sharing agreement):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver_License_Agreement

Great, thanks, not sure why it didn't come up for me, wrong keywords perhaps. I know it's off topic but since I mentioned Florida (and since some states might choose to ignore any federal bill passed r/t CC) how does Florida get away with not accepting certain licenses?

Because the Supreme Court has not yet expanded the Second Amendment to include concealed carry as a right imposed upon the States by the 14th Amendment.

Sorry, I wasn't clear in my question. I meant if there is an agreement with the states on DL' s how does Florida legally get away with not accepting certain DL's from another state. I should've said "How does Florida with away with not accepting certain drivers licenses?

[schmieg]

Great, thanks, not sure why it didn't come up for me, wrong keywords perhaps. I know it's off topic but since I mentioned Florida (and since some states might choose to ignore any federal bill passed r/t CC) how does Florida get away with not accepting certain licenses?

Because the Supreme Court has not yet expanded the Second Amendment to include concealed carry as a right imposed upon the States by the 14th Amendment.

Sorry, I wasn't clear in my question. I meant if there is an agreement with the states on DL' s how does Florida legally get away with not accepting certain DL's from another state. I should've said "How does Florida with away with not accepting certain drivers licenses?

I've never heard of a case where Florida arrested a non-resident for driving on his state's valid driver's license. Expound please.

[Brian D.]

I'm scratching my head about the same thing, Mike. As Ricky Ricardo used to say: "M-Quigley, you got some 'splainin' to do!!"

On the way out of Florida on I-75 years ago, driving my dad's pickup with cap, I didn't pull into the weigh/inspection station as was apparently required at the time. Quickly caught up with and stopped by the Florida Highway Patrol. At that time the state was on a big kick about citrus fruit being stolen out of the groves along roadways.

Point being, (didn't want to make this post an SMM_Associates type novel) they had no problem with my Ohio drivers license.

[M-Quigley]

Because the Supreme Court has not yet expanded the Second Amendment to include concealed carry as a right imposed upon the States by the 14th Amendment.

Sorry, I wasn't clear in my question. I meant if there is an agreement with the states on DL' s how does Florida legally get away with not accepting certain DL's from another state. I should've said "How does Florida with away with not accepting certain drivers licenses?

I've never heard of a case where Florida arrested a non-resident for driving on his state's valid driver's license. Expound please.

The link to the article that I posted early in this thread never said anyone was arrested (yet) it's a fairly new law in Florida. (July 1st)
My guess is if Florida does stop someone and they have one of those particular licenses and is arrested, then I guess we will see if the courts side with Florida or not?

https://www.fortmyersbeachtalk.com/2023 ... ecognized/

Certain classes of driver licenses Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Rhode Island and Vermont are no longer valid in Florida.

The Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles has published a list of out-of-state license classes that are invalid as of July 1 in accordance with Senate Bill 1718.

Each of the five states has classes of licenses that are invalid, including “limited purpose driver’s license,” “limited purpose instruction permit,” “limited purpose provisional driver’s license” and “not valid for use for official federal purposes” for Hawaii.

The bill specifically prohibits the issuance of a driver’s license to anyone who does not provide proof of lawful presence in the U.S.

[schmieg]

Sorry, I wasn't clear in my question. I meant if there is an agreement with the states on DL' s how does Florida legally get away with not accepting certain DL's from another state. I should've said "How does Florida with away with not accepting certain drivers licenses?

I've never heard of a case where Florida arrested a non-resident for driving on his state's valid driver's license. Expound please.

The link to the article that I posted early in this thread never said anyone was arrested (yet) it's a fairly new law in Florida. (July 1st)
My guess is if Florida does stop someone and they have one of those particular licenses and is arrested, then I guess we will see if the courts side with Florida or not?

https://www.fortmyersbeachtalk.com/2023 ... ecognized/

Certain classes of driver licenses Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Rhode Island and Vermont are no longer valid in Florida.

The Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles has published a list of out-of-state license classes that are invalid as of July 1 in accordance with Senate Bill 1718.

Each of the five states has classes of licenses that are invalid, including “limited purpose driver’s license,” “limited purpose instruction permit,” “limited purpose provisional driver’s license” and “not valid for use for official federal purposes” for Hawaii.

The bill specifically prohibits the issuance of a driver’s license to anyone who does not provide proof of lawful presence in the U.S.

I'm just going to venture a guess here that possibly the terms of the interstate compact on drivers' licenses has language that insinuates licenses must be issued to legal residents of the home state and Florida is cracking down on this. I seem to recall some brouhaha about certain states issuing licenses to illegal aliens a few years ago and this is probably related to that. I don't have immediate access to the language of the interstate compact, nor am I currently inclined to attempt to research it at the moment, but that's what it sounds like might be the reason. If I have time in the future, I will see if I can find the thing and try to read it.