|
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 |
#121
|
||||
|
||||
Robert M. Loeb just made an appearance. That guy is a stone cold killer.
https://www.orrick.com/People/4/A/4/Robert-Loeb He is one of the top appellate attorneys in the country. The county is planning on taking this to the Supreme Court. |
#122
|
||||
|
||||
And who is funding the county on this?
I doubt Bob is either cheap or working pro bono.
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.” Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs. |
#123
|
||||
|
||||
Honestly this is a pretty good Supreme Court case. The real problem with the AR 15 cases is there is a great chance we will lose them at the Supreme Court.
Especially now with Scalia gone. This is the type of case that the Supreme Court would have to say well sure if there is a right to own them then you can't ban all gun stores. |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#125
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The Heller minority would would throw the baby of stare decisis out with the bath water faster than Sotomayor could say 'settled law' in her confirmation hearing.
__________________
www.christopherjhoffman.com The Second Amendment is the one right that is so fundamental that the inability to exercise it, should the need arise, would render all other rights null and void. Dead people have no rights. Magna est veritas et praevalebit Last edited by Maestro Pistolero; 07-17-2016 at 12:05 PM.. |
#126
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#127
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
A case comes to mind (what was that case?) where a CCA found that people have a 'right' to a perception of safety therefore common semi-auto rifles could be banned? Cert denied, as I recall.
__________________
www.christopherjhoffman.com The Second Amendment is the one right that is so fundamental that the inability to exercise it, should the need arise, would render all other rights null and void. Dead people have no rights. Magna est veritas et praevalebit Last edited by Maestro Pistolero; 07-17-2016 at 2:41 PM.. |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Quote:
|
#129
|
||||
|
||||
|
#130
|
||||
|
||||
War is peace, black is white ...
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.” Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs. |
#131
|
||||
|
||||
Filed order (DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, BARRY G. SILVERMAN and CARLOS T. BEA): Appellants are directed to file a response to the Petition for Rehearing or Rehearing En Banc, filed with this court on July 21, 2016. The response shall be filed within 21 days of the date of this order. Parties who are registered for Appellate ECF must file the response electronically without submission of paper copies. Parties who are not registered Appellate ECF filers must file the original response plus 50 paper copies. [10064766] (AF) [Entered: 07/27/2016 09:21 AM]
|
#133
|
||||
|
||||
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastor...7/13-17132.pdf
en banc it goes |
#134
|
|||
|
|||
Again?!?
What fricking joke.
__________________
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves. - William Pitt |
#136
|
||||
|
||||
Agreed. I'm hoping that the new Supreme Court can send the 9th Circuit a message. There will be plenty of opportunities on this issue at this rate.
__________________
DISCLAIMER: The information contained herein is general in nature, which may not apply to particular factual or legal circumstances, and is intended for informational purposes only. Consistent with Calguns policy, the information does not constitute legal advice or opinions and should not be relied upon as such. Transmission of the information is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act upon any information in my posts without seeking professional counsel. |
#137
|
||||
|
||||
Send a message, my *****. Send a firing squad. And by firing squad, I mean Trey Gowdy and some other Constitutionalists to set those bums straight on the law of the land.
__________________
Active Army 1976-1986, Army Reserve 2005-2015, Afghanistan 2010-2011 http://www.thepolemicist.net/2013/01...t-for-gun.html https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ “This decision is a freedom calculus decided long ago by Colonists who cherished individual freedom more than the subservient security of a British ruler. The freedom they fought for was not free of cost then, and it is not free now.” - Hon. Roger T. Benitez, United States District Judge, March 29, 2019 |
#138
|
|||
|
|||
Again, the relevant law doesn't matter. The 9th Circus is devoted to killing liberty.
You go to the 9th and one way or another you lose. So far as SCOTUS? Remember that Scalia appeared to be solid on the RKBA and with him aboard the SCOTUS was not slapping the 9th around - which means that replacing him isn't going to fix the issue. You need at least 2 Trump SCOTUS appointments in order to have great hope of SCOTUS fixing things.
__________________
CGN's token life-long teetotaling vegetarian. Don't consider anything I post as advice or as anything more than opinion (if even that). |
#140
|
|||
|
|||
That's it. Time for the Trump DoJ to crawl over every inch of these judges' lives and find something to remove them over. If they are going to allow their personal preferences to guide their choices over the rule of law and their oath to the Constitution it's time to pull them off the bench and replace them with those who will honor that oath. Additionally, these en-banc votes need to be public so that it can be identified if certain judges are engaging in a pattern or practice of partiality.
Last edited by ironpegasus; 12-28-2016 at 8:54 AM.. |
#141
|
||||
|
||||
En banc is exceptionally rare, unless it is a pro gun ruining in the 9th circuit; then it is garunteed.
|
#143
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/12/2...gun-store-law/
__________________
240+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives. |
#144
|
|||
|
|||
Perceived to be of Constitutional importance... Riiiiiiight. Because there's need to take it en banc if you think they got it right in the original ruling. Was this even submitted for en banc as the Merc implies? I was under the impression that this was another sua sponte instance - which should be "an even smaller fraction" - but when it comes to a right enshrined in the BoR, I guess we can expect it to be brought up every time if it rules in favor of the right instead of restriction...
|
#145
|
||||
|
||||
Luckily a lot of justices on the 9th are getting old. If we get 8yrs of Trump there is a real chance of less bs from the 9th.
|
#147
|
|||
|
|||
__________________
------------------------- |
#148
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
240+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives. |
#149
|
||||
|
||||
Calguns meetup at the court?
Wear NRA or other pro-2A gear?
__________________
Active Army 1976-1986, Army Reserve 2005-2015, Afghanistan 2010-2011 http://www.thepolemicist.net/2013/01...t-for-gun.html https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ “This decision is a freedom calculus decided long ago by Colonists who cherished individual freedom more than the subservient security of a British ruler. The freedom they fought for was not free of cost then, and it is not free now.” - Hon. Roger T. Benitez, United States District Judge, March 29, 2019 |
#150
|
||||
|
||||
I have a molon labe t shirt that I always wear when attending court. Think that or something else that let's people know what case you are there for.
|
#151
|
||||
|
||||
Business casual is preferred I think. We can generally tell which sides people are on based on with whom they congregate.
__________________
I hate people that are full of hate. It's not illegal to tip for PPT! |
#152
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
At Peruta en banc there was a heavy LEO presence- yes it's a courthouse, but they brought in extra people and I think might have had more long guns present too. Come for the discussion/to support our side. Don't expect any impact except the other side murmuring about the fervent gun nuts that come out for these things.
__________________
|
#153
|
||||
|
||||
Well, there are extremes of dress.
When I go to those things, I wear a suit. People think I'm a lawyer. If someone come in all camo, that's the clip that will make the news - but the TV people won't bother to talk to him/her. If folks come Dressed Like Everybody Else, there's nothing the TV drones can focus on. They completely miss the message "Dressed Like Everybody Else? They are like everybody else; nothing extreme here."
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.” Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs. |
#154
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
IMO, "business casual" of a longsleeved white Oxford with tie is the WORST I'd wear in court, as an observer (vs as a party or witness). Inside courtrooms are NOT the place to make political statements by your dress, esp if you are on the opposite side of the judges already. Why leave them with "a bad taste in their mouths" about 2nd A advocates when we'll probably be in front of them again in the future?
__________________
240+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives. |
#155
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
What's going to happen? The judge who was pro gun will decide if you're too slovenly to wear a tie he'll decide differently just to spite us? If a judge was on the fence, the sight of an untied collar will decide the case? And given the animus of the 9th, and our proven history of en banc courts in guns, you really think there's enough of a margin an unadorned collar will make the difference? Or the court will grind to a halt, and a judge will order you ejected? Fined? Imprisoned? Lashed? For having the audacity to wear a striped collared shirt with a collar button undone while remaining silent as an observer, in the 3rd row? Look, I respect you paladin, and if you have superstition or whatever- just tell me and ask me to respect that and you'll get a lot further. As is, it seems like you're asking me to take FUD as verifiable proven facts, which I reflexively reject. The evidence you cite is from a LAWYER. Darn right anytime I'm BEFORE a judge I'll dress to the nines. But there is no evidence I'm aware of, or has been presented to me, about doing anything as an observer short of Manson family behavior that will create a problem.
__________________
Last edited by lowimpactuser; 03-10-2017 at 8:04 AM.. |
#156
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Come on, the only statement you want to make in a court is how much you respect the court's status. You need to dress like you're taking it seriously because it is serious.
__________________
"Weakness is provocative." Senator Tom Cotton, president in 2024 Victoria "Tori" Rose Smith's life mattered. |
#157
|
||||
|
||||
Obviously I wear a suit when I am appearing in court but I show up to see my friends argue when they have a big case all the time. I just wear my street cloths. Trust me the judges don't care. If its a trial court I might get a smile or a nod if I know them. Most of the time these people don't take any notice at all at who is there much less how they are dressed.
|
#158
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Just because something is permitted does not mean it is wise to do. Rather, that liberty gives each person room to show themselves as wise or foolish. Quote:
The question I have for you is why would you want to do otherwise? (out of here until tonight)
__________________
240+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives. Last edited by Paladin; 03-10-2017 at 8:33 AM.. |
#159
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
No, totally serious! What marginal difference does a collared shirt WITHOUT a tie make? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Some people say, "no glove, no love". I say, "No benefit, no tie".
__________________
|
#160
|
||||
|
||||
Good heavens!
If you don't want to wear a tie, don't. Clean shirt with a collar. I'd suggest better-than-bowling-team-shirt, if you have such. I suspect, as wolfwood has reported, court officers don't really care about appearance in the gallery. Behavior, OTOH, will be noticed. Also, for those going, no CCW - the court will not let you in, and they will not check your weapon, unless you are LEO. Further, plan to check your knives; those can't come in, either, but they will hold them and give you a receipt.
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.” Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|