New York References 14th Century English Statute to Defend Gun Control Laws...

[Frodo]

...namely the 1328 Statute of Northampton, proclaimed during the reign of King Edward III:

Can New Yorkers carry guns? A 700 year-old law may inform Supreme Court's Second Amendment decision

And here it is in its original English translation:

Statute of Northampton
2 Edw. 3, c. 3 (1328)

Item, it is enacted, that no man great nor small, of what condition soever he be, except the king's servants in his presence, and his ministers in executing of the king's precepts, or of their office, and such as be in their company assisting them, and also [upon a cry made for arms to keep the peace, and the same in such places where such acts happen,] be so hardy to come before the King's justices, or other of the King's ministers doing their office, with force and arms, nor bring no force in affray of the peace, nor to go nor ride armed by night nor by day, in fairs, markets, nor in the presence of the justices or other ministers, nor in no part elsewhere, upon pain to forfeit their armour to the King, and their bodies to prison at the King's pleasure. And that the King's justices in their presence, sheriffs, and other ministers in their bailiwicks, lords of franchises, and their bailiffs in the same, and mayors and bailiffs of cities and boroughs, within the same cities and boroughs, and borough-holders, constables, and wardens of the peace within their wards, shall have power to execute this act. And that the justices assigned, at their coming down into the country, shall have power to enquire how such officers and lords have exercised their offices in this case, and to punish them whom they find that have not done that which pertained to their office.

[GregTheGreat657]

A statue from 1329 (especially one in another country) should not be guiding our policy in 21st century in America

[StateBoiler]

A statue from 1329 (especially one in another country) should not be guiding our policy in 21st century in America

Believe the word you're looking for is statute, though I agree.

Was the judge the same one that stated in court John Anderson in 1980 was not a sore loser?

[Brother Jonathan]

It's an interesting approach. I appreciate that they are trying to effectively outflank the originalists here. And that some important conservative lawyers have signed onto briefs supporting the argument is also interesting. Also worth noting here that in Heller Scalia seemed to agree at least in part with New York's understanding of the statute.

I also understand, though I haven't listened to the oral argument yet, that the argument against this is basically that the statute was designed more narrowly to restrict bearing weapons in a "terrorizing" way which I suppose I can understand as well, and there seem to be cases that support this understanding as well—though it seems the precedent is mixed to some extent.

[brucejoel99]

This is actually quite a common thing to do. Indeed, it's usually a much more relevant factor because of common law than any arguments that are based on comparative &/or international law analysis, arguments which are often used by amici curiae in their briefs & were often used on the Court by Justices O'Connor &, to a much more significant extent, Kennedy.

[Benjamin Frank]

1. English Common law is the basis for most U.S law, except, in Louisiana and maybe Maine.

2.That's nothing:
Judge Schroeder in the Rittenhouse trial, for some strange reason, decided to give the jury a law school class on the hearsay rule, which veered off into a discussion of a Bible passage on the trial of Paul.

https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1456016373965107203

[Mr. Reactionary]

Pre-1607 English common law is law in Virginia unless superseded by statute.

[Ferguson97]

A statue from 1329 (especially one in another country) should not be guiding our policy in 21st century in America

But should a document from 1788?

[GregTheGreat657]

A statue from 1329 (especially one in another country) should not be guiding our policy in 21st century in America

But should a document from 1788?

At least that is actually from our country and is the basis for our laws

[(no subject)]

The U.S. Constitution is also the fount of a lot of problems in the modern era, for example it was written before the existence of political parties. It is not the Monument to the supposed genius of the founding fathers that Republicans make it out to be.

[Benjamin Frank]

A statue from 1329 (especially one in another country) should not be guiding our policy in 21st century in America

But should a document from 1788?

At least that is actually from our country and is the basis for our laws

English common law is the basis for many American laws except in Louisiana and, I believe, Maine.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I would say that this 1328 law is superseded by the Bill of Rights, 1689: "That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law;" as amended by our own First and Second Amendments, so that even vile Papists may bear arms. At minimum, if they're counting on this 1328 law as authority, they better be prepared to show it being used between 1689 and 1776 to limit possession of arms in the Kingdom of England (of Great Britain after 1707).