Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > 2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion Discuss California 2A related litigation and legal topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #241  
Old 10-06-2018, 7:52 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 16,629
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CCWFacts View Post
So, if I'm understanding, they want to skip the panel and go to an en banc directly? Is this commonly done? I've never heard of it (IANAL). I guess the logic is, spend minimum time at the 9CCA level, to go to cert faster? This is good, because I think cert isn't a thing that California wants at this point, and California might just do a risk assessment and decide that fighting this case at SCOTUS isn't desirable, just like what happened with Wrenn.
Following the issuance of a three judge panel order or opinion, parties may seek rehearing before an en banc court.
source
The question is, “how does this affect the plaintiff “Young”?
Reply With Quote
  #242  
Old 10-06-2018, 8:20 AM
CCWFacts CCWFacts is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,674
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
The question is, “how does this affect the plaintiff “Young”?
I'm more wondering, how does Young affect this appeal? I'm reading their brief and it's well written and a good read, but... it cites the Young panel, over and over. IANAL and I'm wondering ... does that make sense? If Young is accepted en banc (which is likely), the panel decision becomes depublished and is no longer precedent, right? In which case, this Flanagan brief loses most of its support.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #243  
Old 10-06-2018, 4:46 PM
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: WV
Posts: 2,377
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CCWFacts View Post
I'm more wondering, how does Young affect this appeal? I'm reading their brief and it's well written and a good read, but... it cites the Young panel, over and over. IANAL and I'm wondering ... does that make sense? If Young is accepted en banc (which is likely), the panel decision becomes depublished and is no longer precedent, right? In which case, this Flanagan brief loses most of its support.
Yes, but for now it's controlling precedent. They need to milk the crap out of Young.
Reply With Quote
  #244  
Old 10-06-2018, 4:49 PM
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: WV
Posts: 2,377
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CCWFacts View Post
So, if I'm understanding, they want to skip the panel and go to an en banc directly? Is this commonly done? I've never heard of it (IANAL). I guess the logic is, spend minimum time at the 9CCA level, to go to cert faster? This is good, because I think cert isn't a thing that California wants at this point, and California might just do a risk assessment and decide that fighting this case at SCOTUS isn't desirable, just like what happened with Wrenn.
Following the issuance of a three judge panel order or opinion, parties may seek rehearing before an en banc court.
source
Maybe I missed it, but I thought CA is asking for en banc directly, Plaintiffs are well served with Young controlling 9th Circuit precedent.
Reply With Quote
  #245  
Old 10-07-2018, 9:05 PM
stag6.8 stag6.8 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,033
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

now since kavanaugh is now confirmed...if flanigan sucessfully goes enbanc and its gets denied ...the supreme court might take it now since kennedy is gone..the person im weary as of now is roberts..he is now the deciding vote..it used to kennedy. enbanc might be a good thing..they might approve ccw and stop it there....like illinois..after all ..new york...new jersey..massachetts..maryland ..hawaii..dont want ccw shall issue..

ALSO...

all forms of open carry in calif. was banned prior to flanigan being filed ..so.. it wont be tainted like peruta was.

Last edited by stag6.8; 10-07-2018 at 9:10 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #246  
Old 10-08-2018, 9:13 AM
sfpcservice's Avatar
sfpcservice sfpcservice is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Suisun City
Posts: 1,546
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

There are many exemptions to the California open carry ban.
__________________
http://theresedoksheim.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/gridlock.jpg

Voting "Yes" on a California bond measure is like giving a degenerate gambler more money because he says he has the game figured out....

John 14:6
Reply With Quote
  #247  
Old 10-08-2018, 10:13 AM
glbtrottr's Avatar
glbtrottr glbtrottr is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: By the Beach, Baby!
Posts: 3,507
iTrader: 48 / 87%
Default

And now, we have 4 women clerking for Kavanaugh...don't feel so overly confident...yet..
__________________
On hold....
Reply With Quote
  #248  
Old 10-08-2018, 2:17 PM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 429
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sfpcservice View Post
There are many exemptions to the California open carry ban.
None which allow a regular citizen to openly carry a loaded firearm in an urban area unless that citizen is running away from someone who is actively trying to kill you, or trying to stop or capture a person who is actively trying to kill someone else. Like Hawaii, security guards in uniform get a pass, but that's about it.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 1:59 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.