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
  #921  
Old 01-19-2019, 12:37 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,389
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Earlier there was a discussion as to whether the panel decision would be attacked since should it be overturned SCOTUS may grant cert. At the time it was composed of four liberals, incuding RGB, four conservatives, and Roberts. Now it is looking like RGB will be off the court and replaced by another conservative. Given this will the libs really want a win en banc that SCOTUS could reverse with the effect being conservative precedence.
Reply With Quote
  #922  
Old 01-19-2019, 8:23 PM
CCWFacts CCWFacts is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,735
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

That's the issue they should be thinking about right now. SCOTUS is not a place where they can win, and even an en banc could be a loss for them. This graphic is from Nov. 2018 so it may not be completely up to date, but it shows what's going on at the circuit level:



In the 9th, the en banc panel is randomly drawn, and someone could do the calculation to see what are the odds of getting a conservative panel of 11 judges from the 9th, esp. when all the seats are filled.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #923  
Old 01-19-2019, 8:54 PM
Robotron2k84 Robotron2k84 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 669
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

https://hotair.com/archives/2019/01/...s-rob-workers/

Quote:
Here’s a case you’ll want to keep an eye on in the months ahead. Since the decision was handed down in Janus v AFSCME, public sector unions, in particular, have been on the ropes. No longer able to extract union dues (or “agency fees”) from workers and use them for political speech the employee may disagree with, the cash cow has largely ceased giving milk. But unions in Oregon clearly aren’t ready to go down without a fight. Legislators in the Beaver State are now moving forward with a bill clearly designed to subvert the Supreme Court decision and keep money flowing into the union coffers.
The leftists know that if they lose control of SCOTUS and aren't able to stack the court, they can always give a straight-up FU to the bench and simply ignore their rulings.

This puts us right at 1836 on the civil war clock. It's just going to get more dicey as time goes on.

Last edited by Robotron2k84; 01-19-2019 at 8:57 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #924  
Old 01-20-2019, 6:49 PM
Offwidth Offwidth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 303
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

No, they can not just ignore the rulings.
Reply With Quote
  #925  
Old 01-20-2019, 7:06 PM
Robotron2k84 Robotron2k84 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 669
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

SCOTUS has no enforcement arm. Federal Marshals can be used to actuate some enforcement, but the constitution does not provide a separate power for SCOTUS to walk down the line with any effect to subdivisions of state governments.

It's largely a magic trick that everyone abides by their decisions, as it is meant as a peacekeeping balance, not to be a component of political power. The fact that it has become such is a consequence of the division present in politics today.

Lower courts actuate enforcement, but if the state and district courts also go rogue what can SCOTUS do? It would be up to the President to utilize the national guard to impose any ruling.

You, in other threads have stated you were born outside of the U.S. It's clear that you don't have a great understanding of this country's history. There was another era where SCOTUS was disregarded and it led to states forming a renegade block and a direct affront to continued control by the Federal Government. Once that block went hot, it was game on and the rest is history. You should look it up.

Leftists ignoring the highest court is a direct cut to the sinew holding our country together and can only go in one direction once rendered ineffective.
Reply With Quote
  #926  
Old 01-20-2019, 8:53 PM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Butte County, California
Posts: 1,942
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robotron2k84 View Post
SCOTUS has no enforcement arm. Federal Marshals can be used to actuate some enforcement, but the constitution does not provide a separate power for SCOTUS to walk down the line with any effect to subdivisions of state governments.

It's largely a magic trick that everyone abides by their decisions, as it is meant as a peacekeeping balance, not to be a component of political power. The fact that it has become such is a consequence of the division present in politics today.

Lower courts actuate enforcement, but if the state and district courts also go rogue what can SCOTUS do? It would be up to the President to utilize the national guard to impose any ruling.
It has been done before! Remember Ike and Little Rock.

Quote:
You, in other threads have stated you were born outside of the U.S. It's clear that you don't have a great understanding of this country's history. There was another era where SCOTUS was disregarded and it led to states forming a renegade block and a direct affront to continued control by the Federal Government. Once that block went hot, it was game on and the rest is history. You should look it up.

Leftists ignoring the highest court is a direct cut to the sinew holding our country together and can only go in one direction once rendered ineffective.
Reply With Quote
  #927  
Old 01-20-2019, 9:55 PM
Robotron2k84 Robotron2k84 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 669
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BAJ475 View Post
It has been done before! Remember Ike and Little Rock.
Which only goes to prove the extreme measures the country was likely to face if the same forces were not countered that beget the Civil War.

Does anyone think Trump would have the same response to a SCOTUS decision to make gun bans unconstitutional, or to limit abortion, or find in favor of CCW?

The leftists know how extreme a position it is to have a Presidential intervention on behalf of SCOTUS, and they will walk right up to the line and spit over on most days. Even they know there is no coming back from such a tactic as outright defiance, unless they have support.

In Arkansas, Faubus, a Democrat, tried for the next two years (after 1957) to fight desegregation and eventually gave up. What if he had success with his referendums and pushed the issue? If he had broader support.

He was isolated, but given the leftists today are angling to have the entire West Coast as a unified block controlling ports and 15% of the country's population, along with sister efforts on the East Coast, we are closing in on another tipping point. Hence my allusion to 1836.
Reply With Quote
  #928  
Old 01-21-2019, 7:16 AM
Offwidth Offwidth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 303
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Robotron, your post here is a pile of delusion mixed up with arrogance. Rest assured I am more educated on the laws and customs of this country than it is apparent from your rambling.
There will be no civil war. SCOTUS will rule on this and CA will obey. It is not a real issue for them, just fodder for polls.

Last edited by Offwidth; 01-21-2019 at 7:21 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #929  
Old 01-21-2019, 8:43 AM
wolfwood's Avatar
wolfwood wolfwood is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,093
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I take no position on whether there will be a civil war. However, if there is a civil war and you live in the Southern California area please consider Firearms Unknown for your civil war firearms purchase. Staffed and represented by Marine Corps veterans we guarantee that our products will withstand the rigors of armed resistance to a tyrannical government.
Reply With Quote
  #930  
Old 01-21-2019, 10:15 AM
mrrabbit mrrabbit is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Northern California
Posts: 3,021
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Offwidth View Post
Robotron, your post here is a pile of delusion mixed up with arrogance. Rest assured I am more educated on the laws and customs of this country than it is apparent from your rambling.
There will be no civil war. SCOTUS will rule on this and CA will obey. It is not a real issue for them, just fodder for polls.
If you want to attack Robotron on the basis of "fear mongering" . . . sure . . . go for it . . .

...but understand the basic point - SCOTUS has no enforcement mechanism.

If the momentum of that part of the political system (legislature, executive and bureaucracy) is one way, and SCOTUS rules the other way - there's nothing stopping the system from simply ignoring SCOTUS.

And if the states are onboard with that same system, the same applies.

And the same for "activist" judges in the Federal appeals courts...

This has happened at least twice in our history...

Once with Jackson...

...and again at the start of the Civil War...with some members of SCOTUS and the print media put under house arrest.

The Constitution and our Bill of Rights and the paper it is printed on is only as good as the people who are supposed to abide by it.

When they don't, it's a cultural failing . . . risk of civil war breaking out has just taken a big jump.

=8-)
__________________
Justice Thomas: " I find it extremely improbable that the Framers understood the Second Amendment to protect little more than carrying a gun from the bedroom to the kitchen. "
Reply With Quote
  #931  
Old 01-21-2019, 10:19 AM
RSC's Avatar
RSC RSC is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: OC
Posts: 92
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

😂🤣😅
Reply With Quote
  #932  
Old 01-21-2019, 12:38 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 8,731
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

18 hours to go!
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #933  
Old 01-21-2019, 12:59 PM
phdo's Avatar
phdo phdo is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,621
iTrader: 39 / 100%
Default Young v. Hawaii (CA9); en banc requested Sep 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
18 hours to go!


What’s going on in 18 hours?
__________________
WTB:
2.5" Smith & Wesson Model 19
2.5" Smith & Wesson Model 66
4" Smith & Wesson Model 19
3.5" Smith & Wesson Model 29
Marlin 1894C
Colt Python
Colt Series 70
Sig Sauer P228
Reply With Quote
  #934  
Old 01-21-2019, 2:28 PM
darkshire's Avatar
darkshire darkshire is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: San Jose
Posts: 1,215
iTrader: 75 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phdo View Post
What’s going on in 18 hours?
In 18 hours, you can confidently say "2 weeks!"
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #935  
Old 01-21-2019, 2:50 PM
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: WV
Posts: 2,439
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phdo View Post
What’s going on in 18 hours?
I think he's referring to the SCOTUS orders wrt the NYRPA case being released tomorrow.
But that's probably going to be another relist
Reply With Quote
  #936  
Old 01-21-2019, 3:27 PM
scbauer's Avatar
scbauer scbauer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Walnut Creek, CA
Posts: 764
iTrader: 32 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfwood View Post
I take no position on whether there will be a civil war. However, if there is a civil war and you live in the Southern California area please consider Firearms Unknown for your civil war firearms purchase. Staffed and represented by Marine Corps veterans we guarantee that our products will withstand the rigors of armed resistance to a tyrannical government.
Spoken like a true lawyer!

Oh, and FWIW, if I were in San Diego I’d go there!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #937  
Old 01-21-2019, 7:14 PM
the-right-way the-right-way is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 183
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CCWFacts View Post
That's the issue they should be thinking about right now. SCOTUS is not a place where they can win, and even an en banc could be a loss for them. This graphic is from Nov. 2018 so it may not be completely up to date, but it shows what's going on at the circuit level:



In the 9th, the en banc panel is randomly drawn, and someone could do the calculation to see what are the odds of getting a conservative panel of 11 judges from the 9th, esp. when all the seats are filled.
No wonder the obama and illegal lovers always sue in the 9th. I would like to see a "creative" lawsuit by a covert patriot in one of the conservative districts take up the case before the 9th gets hold of it. Especially immigration issues. Seems they think that borders are meant to be crossed.
Reply With Quote
  #938  
Old 01-21-2019, 10:14 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 8,731
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
I think he's referring to the SCOTUS orders wrt the NYRPA case being released tomorrow.
But that's probably going to be another relist


Wrong thread. My mistake.... (Psst! 8 hours and 15 minutes. )
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #939  
Old 01-24-2019, 1:31 PM
kuug's Avatar
kuug kuug is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 163
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I've forgotten, is there a time limit on the call for en banc?
Reply With Quote
  #940  
Old 01-24-2019, 3:05 PM
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: WV
Posts: 2,439
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kuug View Post
I've forgotten, is there a time limit on the call for en banc?
Not really. Typically a long delay means en banc will be denied but there are dissents being written.
However, this IS the 9th Circuit we're talking about.
Reply With Quote
  #941  
Old 01-24-2019, 3:49 PM
ritter ritter is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: North Bay Area
Posts: 140
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
Not really. Typically a long delay means en banc will be denied but there are dissents being written.
However, this IS the 9th Circuit we're talking about.
Dissents, you think? One wonders what bearing SCOTUS taking the NYRPA case will have on Young. Do they hold until SCOTUS decision (potentially a long time)? Do they deny the en banc request and go with the original decision and we get open carry fearing SCOTUS appeal? Do they appoint an en banc panel, reverse and hope like hell for a different SCOTUS by the time it's appealed? So many tea leaves on the table...
Reply With Quote
  #942  
Old 01-24-2019, 5:19 PM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ritter View Post
Dissents, you think? One wonders what bearing SCOTUS taking the NYRPA case will have on Young. Do they hold until SCOTUS decision (potentially a long time)? Do they deny the en banc request and go with the original decision and we get open carry fearing SCOTUS appeal? Do they appoint an en banc panel, reverse and hope like hell for a different SCOTUS by the time it's appealed? So many tea leaves on the table...
There is no real reason to hold it. As I recall, it takes only one judge to request en banc for the case to be taken, and if my recollection is accurate, holding for dissents doesn't make any sense. Further, the whole Circuit is basically forced to concede that there is a right to "bear," especially after counsel for California c=admitt3d as much at oral arguments in Peruta. The next question, then, is how far rest4rictions on "bear" can go before they become unconstitutional. As to that, Hawaii has a problem, because it is pretty clear that they do not accord the right to anyone other than police officers and armed guards "protecting life and property". (The Hawaii carry permit is good for both open and concealed carry,) All that the underlying decision, as well stated as it was, really accomplished was to tell Hawaii counties that they have to consider applications by "mere" citizens seeking a permit for self defense, but (again if I remember correctly), the decision does not explicitly overturn the "may issue" portion of the law except to the extent that there is no process to appeal a denial. That being so, there is really no reason for any further review.
Reply With Quote
  #943  
Old 01-24-2019, 8:51 PM
jwkincal's Avatar
jwkincal jwkincal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,470
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruOil View Post
There is no real reason to hold it. As I recall, it takes only one judge to request en banc for the case to be taken
One judge may call for a case to be heard en banc, but it requires a majority vote of all active circuit judges for the procedure to be actually approved and undertaken.
__________________
Get the hell off the beach. Get up and get moving. Follow Me! --Aubrey Newman, Col, 24th INF; at the Battle of Leyte

Certainty of death... small chance of success... what are we waiting for? --Gimli, son of Gloin; on attacking the vast army of Mordor

Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!
I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
--Patrick Henry; Virginia, 1775
Reply With Quote
  #944  
Old 01-26-2019, 10:11 AM
ulmapache's Avatar
ulmapache ulmapache is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 134
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robotron2k84 View Post
Which only goes to prove the extreme measures the country was likely to face if the same forces were not countered that beget the Civil War.

Does anyone think Trump would have the same response to a SCOTUS decision to make gun bans unconstitutional, or to limit abortion, or find in favor of CCW?

The leftists know how extreme a position it is to have a Presidential intervention on behalf of SCOTUS, and they will walk right up to the line and spit over on most days. Even they know there is no coming back from such a tactic as outright defiance, unless they have support.

In Arkansas, Faubus, a Democrat, tried for the next two years (after 1957) to fight desegregation and eventually gave up. What if he had success with his referendums and pushed the issue? If he had broader support.

He was isolated, but given the leftists today are angling to have the entire West Coast as a unified block controlling ports and 15% of the country's population, along with sister efforts on the East Coast, we are closing in on another tipping point. Hence my allusion to 1836.
The leftists have control of West Coast URBAN areas...but not the rest of the states.. And if the leftist union allies should try to put pressure on the rest of the country with some form of work stoppage at the ports, I can easily see the feds coming in with nat'l guard personnel familiar with port ops to negate that threat...
Reply With Quote
  #945  
Old 01-26-2019, 4:07 PM
Metal God's Avatar
Metal God Metal God is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
The leftists have control of West Coast URBAN areas...but not the rest of the states.
You seem to forget those urban areas control the vote . Which intern controls the legislature , which intern controls the laws of said state making what ever they do lawful . When you fight it in court , guess who hears your case ? Hmm the 9th does .

Check out this map and the numbers of votes . This is what happens when your side owns the urban areas
https://www.nytimes.com/elections/20...s/indiana.html
which then changes the course of history .
__________________
Tolerate
allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of (something that one does not necessarily like or agree with) without interference.

Anyone else find it sad that those who preach tolerance CAN'T allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of (something that they do not necessarily like or agree with) without interference.

If you have the time check this out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04wyGK6k6HE or a picture of Mohamed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VwpwP_fIqY
Reply With Quote
  #946  
Old 01-31-2019, 10:08 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 8,731
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Thinking about Young and the 5 circuit judges Trump has nominated/renominated for CA9. Trump already has 2 on CA9. Plus there's 1 more opening.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...ng_nominations

When, between accepting the case and orals are the judges for the en banc panel selected? Are only active judges who participated in the vote (for or against en banc) eligible to hear it? Or can newbies who get seated after the vote be selected to participate too?
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif

Last edited by Paladin; 01-31-2019 at 10:11 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #947  
Old 02-01-2019, 3:25 PM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
Thinking about Young and the 5 circuit judges Trump has nominated/renominated for CA9. Trump already has 2 on CA9. Plus there's 1 more opening.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...ng_nominations

When, between accepting the case and orals are the judges for the en banc panel selected? Are only active judges who participated in the vote (for or against en banc) eligible to hear it? Or can newbies who get seated after the vote be selected to participate too?
If I recall correctly, the judges are randomly selected from all ACTIVE judges after the case is accepted for en banc review. I don't know how oral argument dates are selected, but it is a long enough period for all of the judges have a chance to read all of the briefs, and for a majority to form as to the disposition of the case (as it is with all appeals). I don't think the names of the members of the panel are announced until shortly before orals.
Reply With Quote
  #948  
Old 02-01-2019, 4:31 PM
Offwidth Offwidth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 303
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

..and a 39 year old former Scalia clerk. Good list..
Reply With Quote
  #949  
Old 02-08-2019, 12:14 PM
wolfwood's Avatar
wolfwood wolfwood is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,093
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

dang it I was enjoying the win to

Filed Order for PUBLICATION (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(a) and Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel disposition in this case shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit. Judges Bennett did not participate in the deliberations or vote in this case. [11184101] (RMM)
Reply With Quote
  #950  
Old 02-08-2019, 12:20 PM
phdo's Avatar
phdo phdo is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,621
iTrader: 39 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfwood View Post
dang it I was enjoying the win to

Filed Order for PUBLICATION (SIDNEY R. THOMAS) Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(a) and Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel disposition in this case shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit. Judges Bennett did not participate in the deliberations or vote in this case. [11184101] (RMM)
Here we go again. Peruta II.
__________________
WTB:
2.5" Smith & Wesson Model 19
2.5" Smith & Wesson Model 66
4" Smith & Wesson Model 19
3.5" Smith & Wesson Model 29
Marlin 1894C
Colt Python
Colt Series 70
Sig Sauer P228
Reply With Quote
  #951  
Old 02-08-2019, 12:21 PM
Robotron2k84 Robotron2k84 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 669
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Sorry that they vacated your win. I had predicted no en banc hearing, but it would seem that the 9th is doubling down on stupid, and that may push SCOTUS all the more to declare the right to bear in NYSRPA. I think this is a huge tactical error on the part of the left and their sycophants on the 9th.
Reply With Quote
  #952  
Old 02-08-2019, 12:22 PM
Offwidth Offwidth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 303
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

F**k this.
Reply With Quote
  #953  
Old 02-08-2019, 12:22 PM
sfpcservice's Avatar
sfpcservice sfpcservice is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Suisun City
Posts: 1,582
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

They know they have a looser, this is just a delay tactic. How long to scotus?
__________________
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
  #954  
Old 02-08-2019, 12:24 PM
sfpcservice's Avatar
sfpcservice sfpcservice is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Suisun City
Posts: 1,582
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robotron2k84 View Post
Sorry that they vacated your win. I had predicted no en banc hearing, but it would seem that the 9th is doubling down on stupid, and that may push SCOTUS all the more to declare the right to bear in NYSRPA. I think this is a huge tactical error on the part of the left and their sycophants on the 9th.
Yep. It will take longer, but this is a good way for the antis to loose the whole country.
__________________
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
  #955  
Old 02-08-2019, 12:34 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,481
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sfpcservice View Post
They know they have a looser, this is just a delay tactic. How long to scotus?
If it's like Peruta, then about 2 years from now.
Reply With Quote
  #956  
Old 02-08-2019, 12:43 PM
ritter ritter is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: North Bay Area
Posts: 140
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Well, that sucks.
Reply With Quote
  #957  
Old 02-08-2019, 12:44 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 8,731
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robotron2k84 View Post
Sorry that they vacated your win. I had predicted no en banc hearing, but it would seem that the 9th is doubling down on stupid, and that may push SCOTUS all the more to declare the right to bear in NYSRPA. I think this is a huge tactical error on the part of the left and their sycophants on the 9th.
As Michael Savage says, liberalism is a mental disease.

Frankly, I'm GLAD Young is going en banc. It will be that much more of a repudiation of the Ninth when they get overturned by SCOTUS. En banc gives RBG (and Sonia) more time to consider retiring.

Plus, we won't have to mess with imitating OH and their LOC protests to get Shall Issue CCWs. SCOTUS will, hopefully, deal with the loaded/unloaded and OC vs CC vs both and permit vs none issues. IOW, after SCOTUS speaks, hopefully we'll know what the RBA means. (Other than, maybe, sidearms vs longarms vs both, knives/clubs/etc. Plus, the questions of what arms are suitable for militia duty and "Shall not be infringed" mean.)

I wonder if the 5 nominees that Trump submitted this year, for the 6 active seats open on CA9, will be seated in time to participate in the en banc appeal?

To avoid any risks, we need to make sure Trump gets re-elected and the GOP maintains their hold on the US Senate.
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif

Last edited by Paladin; 02-08-2019 at 12:57 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #958  
Old 02-08-2019, 12:54 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 8,731
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

What's the likelihood Nichols will get merged into the Young en banc appeal?

Pluses/minuses?
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #959  
Old 02-08-2019, 1:13 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 8,731
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Wouldn't it be something if SCOTUS grants cert in Rogers and reaches down and b---- slaps CA9 by grabbing the Young en banc appeal and deciding both cases together?
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif

Last edited by Paladin; 02-08-2019 at 1:24 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #960  
Old 02-08-2019, 1:35 PM
BryMan92 BryMan92 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 90
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

If SCOTUS rules in NYSRPA that the right exists outside the home (hopefully, using some history/tradition test and not using some undefined "reasonable" limitations), then with Young they could say "sure, OC is the right, but you can still be required to show good cause and good cause is not a de facto ban"? It seems the en banc *may* be good to allow for the following additional/potential additional gains: 1) right outside the home and 2) good cause is unconstitutional.
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 1:48 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.