|
2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion Discuss California 2A related litigation and legal topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
||||
|
||||
Tagging da new threaddddddddd
__________________
^^^The above is just an opinion. NRA Patron Member CRPA 5 yr Member "...which from their verbosity, their endless tautologies, their involutions of case within case, and parenthesis within parenthesis, and their multiplied efforts at certainty by saids and aforesaids, by ors and by ands, to make them more plain, do really render them more perplexed and incomprehensible, not only to common readers, but to lawyers themselves. " - Thomas Jefferson |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
At least you have an option that could work. Here in Hawaii there is no one that one can NINETEEN HOURS!! |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Cheers........
.......from a fellow supporter of the RKBA living in the frozen tundra of Oceanside!
|
#50
|
|||
|
|||
__________________
Mark C. DFW, TX |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
It goes to the next conference presumably, which is October.
|
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Most likely but no guarantee.
|
#54
|
|||
|
|||
From SCOTUSblog:
Do you expect that the Court will announce any additional opinion days? Or do you think they'll hand everything down today and over the next two Mondays? Amy Howe Perhaps Andrew or Edith will chime in with the exact number of cases outstanding, but my recollection is that they will likely add at least one or two decision days. If you divided the number of opinions left by three, it would make for a couple of very heavy loads. Can the term expire without action on the relisted cases? What happens if the term expires for those cases? Amy Howe It could in theory, but I think that they will almost certainly act on them by the end of the term.
__________________
|
#58
|
|||
|
|||
How would that work? Outside of agreeing on a right to carry, the plaintiffs disagree on the manner.
|
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
1) Does the 2A guarantee a right to carry a loaded firearm in public for immediate personal defense? 2) Can the Gov't (at any level) determine the manner of legal carry? 3) Is permitting/licensing constitutional when it comes to the free exercise of a fundamental right? At a minimum we absolutely need to get an answer to #1, because right now the lower courts have been refusing to answer that simple question and dancing around the issue to pass the buck off onto SCOTUS. By combining the cases then you could in theory answer all 3 of those questions in one decision. All of the old state cases regarding concealed carry found that banning concealed was legal because unrestricted open carry was available and protected by the 2A. But the reasons for dislike of concealed at the time were largely for "social manners" kinda reasons. So the question could become as "social manners" change with time, can the state opt for one form of carry over the other, so long as at least ONE form of unrestricted carry is available? Seems to me that is only one means of carry is available it should not also be subject to a license/permit.
__________________
"Freedom begins with an act of defiance" Quote for the day: Quote:
Last edited by Untamed1972; 06-12-2017 at 9:53 AM.. |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
What am I misrepresenting? Heller clearly defined what bearing arms meant, which including descriptions of concealed carry. Other state court cases upheld the banning of concealed carry because they clearly stated the open carry was the protected 2A right. The lower courts have been dancing around that since Heller was released. I was actually in the court room to hear the first oral arguments for Peruta at the district court. We have some courts saying banning OC is ok because CC is available, we have other courts saying the opposite. The original Peruta ruling said may-issue was legal because we had UOC at the time. Then the en banc panel completely ingnored that wasn't even available anymore at the time of its kangaroo court ruling. If you put both cases together the court....if they act honorably would have to address all 3 questions I stated in my first post.
__________________
"Freedom begins with an act of defiance" Quote for the day: Quote:
|
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I wish they would... or better still, have the conferences recorded for public viewing/listening. What are they hiding? |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I just don't see how the cases get combined, they are too different. At a minimum, one case gets heard while the other basically gets put away and then remanded after the other is decided. But with these two cases, if one wins the other should lose theoretically, so it doesn't make sense to hold one. |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Not yet, he still has a month or two left and Lawyers almost never file early.
|
#67
|
||||
|
||||
No reference immediately available but if memory serves, Norma has until 25 July, 2017.
|
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Hopefully you are wrong about the denial of cert, however if SCOTUS can't count to five, then we probably dodge a bullet here and hope that Kennedy retires at the end of the month and takes RBG with him. |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Although a denial is likely, let's hope for some actual guidance, like "bring an open carry suit".
|
#71
|
||||
|
||||
Can someone explain to me why I see posts that say denial is highly probable?
I'm a logical thinker and I am simply drawing a blank when I see that. Under what theory or fundamental principle is denial something that will likely happen? Evidence? Explanation? Something... |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#76
|
|||
|
|||
I Think this is what you are looking for.
http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/09/th...cs-of-relists/ http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/09/th...cs-of-relists/ |
#77
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#78
|
|||
|
|||
For the third or fourth, or maybe even fifth time:
http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/10/th...ber-term-2015/ |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
|
#80
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Following the statistics (what other rational, evidence-based basis is there for speculation?), I'd suspect denial of cert, as that will follow the pattern. But, anything can happen... because there's no "reason" Peruta couldn't be one of those diminishingly-small-percentage anomalies. IF cert IS denied, most "exciting" for me would be several lengthy, "strongly-worded" dissents from, and concurrences of, denial. That'd be good reading. Last edited by surfgeorge; 06-14-2017 at 2:13 PM.. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|