The case is Rogers v. Grewal, which challenges New Jersey's restrictive firearms carry license policy. There's a split on the subject among lower courts; the details are a bit complicated, but the short version is that the First, Second, Third, and Fourth Circuits have upheld such restrictive policies, while the Seventh, Ninth, and D.C. Circuits, together with the Illinois Supreme Court have struck down some such policies. Several amicus briefs support the petition, including one signed by, among others, the California State Sheriffs' Association, which "represents each of the fifty-eight California sheriffs."
Sounds like an opportunity sitting on a tee.New Jersey resident Thomas Rogers requested a permit to carry a firearm in public. According to court records, he admits he “does not face any special danger to his life.”
New Jersey is among the states that are considered "may issue states." According to the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, states with these laws give the issuing authority the right to decide if a concealed weapons permit is merited.
SNIP
But in the New Jersey case, the police chief denied Rogers' permit application because he was not able to show a “justifiable need." Rogers appealed the decision to the state’s superior court, but his application was denied by the judge.
SNIP
The U.S. District Court of New Jersey dismissed the case in May because it said the 3rd Circuit Court ruled the state’s “justifiable need” requirement constitutional.
Rogers and the firearm organization are now appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court to decide:
If the Second Amendment allows the right to carry a firearm outside of the home for self-defense.
If the government can deny the right to carry a firearm outside of the home to someone following the law by requiring that they have a special need to carry a firearm.
Now that football is over, is there some kind of market for taking bets on whether or not the Great SCOTUS Goalie gets involved?