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 > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-18-2008, 7:02 PM
hoffmang's Avatar
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,448
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default Nordyke: Important breaking news - same panel remains

All,

I've posted before on this topic but we just received some exciting news today. The original panel in Nordyke v. King (07-15763) is keeping the case for the current appeal. That panel consists of Alarcón, O’Scannlain and Gould.

This panel wrote a very pro second amendment opinion the first time they remanded the case to the District Court. Make sure you read footnote 4 of the majority opinion and then all of Gould's special concurrence and his footnotes.

This case is likely to be heard at oral argument in the next 90 days. It's holding would generally be binding on the 9th Circuit shortly thereafter.

As soon as I know when oral arguments are scheduled, I'll post that here. I for one will be attending.

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!


"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-18-2008, 7:50 PM
ke6guj's Avatar
ke6guj ke6guj is offline
Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 909
Posts: 23,761
iTrader: 42 / 100%
Default

Cool. Sounds like we might have gotten a good panel. Would be nice to be incorporated in the 9th in 6-9 months and be able to na-na-na the CA-bashers
__________________
Jack



Do you want an AOW or C&R SBS/SBR in CA?

No posts of mine are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-18-2008, 8:05 PM
taloft's Avatar
taloft taloft is offline
Well used Member
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Lemon Grove
Posts: 2,698
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Never mind, I figured it out from the link.
__________________
.




"Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something."--Plato

Last edited by taloft; 07-18-2008 at 8:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-18-2008, 8:44 PM
ke6guj's Avatar
ke6guj ke6guj is offline
Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 909
Posts: 23,761
iTrader: 42 / 100%
Default

this is the Alameda gun show ban law suit. It has been in the court system for years. It has been to the CA Supreme court and the 9th circuit in the past. It is back in front of the 9th, and with the Heller ruling, argueing infront of the same panel, by reading the ruling, it is felt that they might give us a pro-heller ruling, and with that possible Incorporation of the 2nd Amendment. Its previous rulings were bound by Hickman, which said that the 2nd was a collective right, not an individual right.


And the possibly of a Circuit court incorporating within 6-9 months of the Heller ruling is amazing. The other suits in process, SF and Chicago could take years to get to this point.



Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
It's a bit complicated but Nordyke has been up and down the 9th Circuit and the CA Supreme court like a yo-yo. The first time around the 9th Circuit certified a question to the CA Supremes of whether bans of firearms on county property were pre-empted. The CA Supremes disengenously said that the laws weren't pre-empted.

The appeals panel in the 9th was bound by Hickman so didn't rule on the 2A that time and sent it back down to the District court for adjudication of the 1A claims. Kilmer asked the District Court judge to brief the 2A and he said no. Kilmer then wrongly lost at the District on the 1A. He appealed both the motion to brief the 2A and the 1A decision and is awaiting his panel of the 9th Circuit Court of appeal. He could get that panel as early as next week.

Cross your fingers for Kozinski!

Alameda County's counsel called Kilmer the other day and asked him when he'd file to supplement his briefs in the current appeal based on Heller.

A bit complex, but it means we could have a 9th Circuit appellate incorporation decision in less than 6 months. If we get a good panel, we'll be incorporated and gun shows will be safe. If we get a bad panel they'll protect gun shows on 1A grounds and gun shows will be safe.

This is how serious a practical impact Heller has.

-Gene
__________________
Jack



Do you want an AOW or C&R SBS/SBR in CA?

No posts of mine are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-18-2008, 8:59 PM
WokMaster1's Avatar
WokMaster1 WokMaster1 is offline
Part time Emperor
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,442
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

Gene, it's not even Christmas yet & between you & Bill there are enough good news to make me giddy & grinning like a chapless baboon.
__________________
"Good friends, good food & good wine. Anything else is just a waste of soy sauce.":)
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-18-2008, 9:10 PM
Theseus's Avatar
Theseus Theseus is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 2,681
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

I have to say that I never thought I would see this day. . . I am not sure, but I think that the judicial is getting tired of the legislators and executive from stamping out our rights such as wiretapping without warrants. I think they may see that the government might be overstepping and are trying to stop it.

I am glad that people are beginning to interpret the 2A as the right of the people for the purpose of replacing an oppressive government. This makes me feel all warm and tingly inside. Now, the real question is if we can make the argument that this means AW are in the clear, because the people need to be properly armed enough to effectively fight the government. . . That would be the real win. . and no more of this 10 round fixed magazine stuff. . .
__________________
Nothing to see here. . . Move along.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-18-2008, 9:34 PM
CCWFacts CCWFacts is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,800
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Wow, this is a major coup if we get incorporation within 6 mo. That would be so cool. Oh, I'm waiting for the fall of PC 12031.
__________________
learn to code
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-18-2008, 9:43 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 9,197
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Great news, Gene.

Does the 9th make audio of the oral arguments available? If so, CGN may want to post a link to it (and Heller's), or put them in some sort of archive.
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-18-2008, 10:27 PM
hoffmang's Avatar
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,448
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
Great news, Gene.

Does the 9th make audio of the oral arguments available? If so, CGN may want to post a link to it (and Heller's), or put them in some sort of archive.
I believe that certain cases do have audio posted about a week after. Keep in mind that we're a couple of months before oral argument in this one though.

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!


"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-19-2008, 12:31 AM
mymonkeyman mymonkeyman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,050
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Let's just hope they don't reject the argument under the 2nd without addressing incorporation. The panel was obviously pro-2nd amendment, but Heller's negative dicta about government land is harmful in this case, and the panel didn't really show its cards as to the ultimate merits of a 2nd amendment defense, only as to its belief that it should be able to hear an individual challenge on 2nd amendment grounds.
__________________
The above does not constitute legal advice. I am not your lawyer.

"[T]he enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table."
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-19-2008, 7:37 AM
Liberty1's Avatar
Liberty1 Liberty1 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,543
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Since licensing in CA (12050PC LTC) exempts one (even while OCing IMO) from 12031, 626.9, and 171b&c it seems that in the style of Dick Heller's case our poster child (with standing) should be someone who has either been denied a license or had one revoked for not a legit cause (and also have attempted to get a loaded and exposed license too with negative results). I wonder where we shall find such a patriot.
__________________
False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.
-- Cesare Beccaria http://www.a-human-right.com/

Last edited by Liberty1; 07-20-2008 at 4:02 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-19-2008, 9:15 AM
hoffmang's Avatar
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,448
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mymonkeyman View Post
Let's just hope they don't reject the argument under the 2nd without addressing incorporation. The panel was obviously pro-2nd amendment, but Heller's negative dicta about government land is harmful in this case, and the panel didn't really show its cards as to the ultimate merits of a 2nd amendment defense, only as to its belief that it should be able to hear an individual challenge on 2nd amendment grounds.
Did you read the footnotes to the concurrence? Gould cites Harlan's dissent in Duncan v. Louisiana. Also, why spend that much time analyzing the Second if you don't think it would apply to state action in a state action case. Finally, you have to read between the lines. The question certified to the Cal Supremes was answered in a most underhanded way and you can see the Federal panel raising an eyebrow about that.

Unclean hands always helps the other side.

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!


"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-19-2008, 9:30 AM
xdimitrix xdimitrix is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 102
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Reading their previous opinion it seems highly likely they will rule for incorporation.

Assuming they rule that way, what are the odds of a second "en banc" review? This happened to Heller if I recall correctly. I could see an "en banc" review being used as a political tool to crush any pro 2nd amendment outcome from this panel.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-19-2008, 12:53 PM
CCWFacts CCWFacts is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,800
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xdimitrix View Post
Assuming they rule that way, what are the odds of a second "en banc" review? This happened to Heller if I recall correctly. I could see an "en banc" review being used as a political tool to crush any pro 2nd amendment outcome from this panel.
DC petitioned for an en banc review and was denied.

A 9th circuit en banc is 11 judges. Do 11 judges there really want to sit through this thing? I hope not.
__________________
learn to code
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-19-2008, 1:05 PM
hoffmang's Avatar
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,448
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

I've thrown up a quick summary of the history and status of the Nordyke case here: http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/in...ordyke_v._King

It's possible that it could be taken en-banc, but I think the math would lead to a panel not voting to take an pro-incorporation case en-banc.

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!


"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-19-2008, 7:43 PM
sorensen440's Avatar
sorensen440 sorensen440 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sonoma
Posts: 8,602
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

that is truely good news I have fond memorys of going to that show when I was in highschool
__________________
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson
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 3:20 AM.




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.