[elenius]

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastor...20/0715763.pdf

[Pvt. Cowboy]

Boned, it appears.

[CCWFacts]

So what does it mean? It says that the Nordykes shouldn't have been able to amend their case, and therefore they don't need to rule based on the 2A, but they still think the 2A is incorporated? So the case is over and we don't get incorporation from it? Or? I don't get it.

And they cite Cruikshank like it's a reasonable decision!

At least they say that Hickman has "evaporated". That is good because that's the case that said, "you can't get a CCW based on the 2A", which opens that up to litigation again.

[GM4spd]

Looks like a loser to me. The Incorporation part looks like a maybe but if you believe the Incorporation is going to result in a change of present CA guns laws I wouldn't bank on it. Pete

[JDoe]

What does this mean on page 41? Is the 2nd incorporated or what?

For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM the district court’s
grant of summary judgment to the County on the Nordykes’
First Amendment and equal protection claims and, although
we conclude that the Second Amendment is indeed incorporated
against the states, we AFFIRM the district court’s
refusal to grant the Nordykes leave to amend their complaint
to add a Second Amendment claim in this case.

[nat]

My first scroll through quickly..........it looks like we got incorporation?

[adamsreeftank]

Looks to me like the Nordykes lost but the incorporation battle was won.

[mecam]

4508
NORDYKE v. KING

Nordykes have not argued that they could meet the exception’s
requirement that firearms be secured whenever an
authorized participant is not actually using them. No wonder.
They have admitted that the very nature of gun shows, in
which vendors show weapons to prospective buyers and
admirers, makes it impossible.
[22] We conclude that the Nordykes are not situated similarly
to the Scottish Games in that they cannot meet the safety
requirements of the exception. The district court was therefore
correct to award the County summary judgment on this claim
as well.
V
For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM the district court’s
grant of summary judgment to the County on the Nordykes’
First Amendment and equal protection claims and, although
we conclude that the Second Amendment is indeed incorporated
against the states, we AFFIRM the district court’s
refusal to grant the Nordykes leave to amend their complaint
to add a Second Amendment claim in this case.

AFFIRMED.

[sorensen440]

Originally Posted by adamsreeftank

Looks to me like the Nordykes lost but the incorporation battle was won.

This is my understanding as well

[tango-52]

A quick scan indicates that we do get incorporation, but that the Nordykes lose on procedural grounds.

[MudCamper]

Well, it has these words in it,

We are therefore persuaded that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment and applies it against the states and local governments

Isn't that all we (big we, the people, not the Nordykes) need?

[DRM6000]

where's gene or bill? this is all greek to me.

[sorensen440]

Originally Posted by MudCamper

Isn't that all we (big we, the people, not the Nordykes) need?

Yes I believe so

[rtlltj]

I'll be waiting for Hoffmang to explain.

[Pvt. Cowboy]

It reads as though the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the Philadelphia Sixers lost their last game against the Phoenix Suns, but they have affirmed that basketballs are indeed roundish spherical-like objects.

[KWA-S]

TLDR:

For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM the district court’s
grant of summary judgment to the County on the Nordykes’
First Amendment and equal protection claims and, although
we conclude that the Second Amendment is indeed incorporated
against the states, we AFFIRM the district court’s
refusal to grant the Nordykes leave to amend their complaint
to add a Second Amendment claim in this case.

So it looks like the Nordykes don't get Almeda gun shows, but the second amendment is incorporated. So, what happens now? I know its probably going to SCOTUS, but until then, the 2A is incorporated and we can challenge UOC (most likely), AWB (the one I'm interested in), and Safe School Zone/machine guns/high caps (hah, not even in your dreams)?

EDIT: 13 posts while I typed my comment. Seems like theres a few Calgunners F5ing the 2A forums at 10:30 each morning waiting for Nordyke. God we need a life.

[EMT007]

Originally Posted by sorensen440

Yes I believe so

agreed - but lets get the lawyers to weigh in

[glockk9mm]

Gene or Bill please explain to us

[sorensen440]

Originally Posted by EMT007

agreed - but lets get the lawyers to weigh in

Or even Gene or Bill
(I suspect they are talking with the lawyers instead of posting right now )

[xxdabroxx]

Well, thus far looks like good news for calgunners.

[DRM6000]

Originally Posted by xxdabroxx

Well, thus far looks like good news for calgunners.

it's good news for ca gun owners period.

[ProlificARProspect]

waiting on the Calguns fondation to explain. It's Greek to me.

[xLusi0n]

Isn't that better? So the County won't appeal?

[tango-52]

Originally Posted by sorensen440

Or even Gene or Bill
(I suspect they are talking with the lawyers instead of posting right now )

I would expect that there is a lot of thorough reading going on to figure out where we go next.

[BLFD1]

After the latest election and current administration, we need some good news to come our way.

[sorensen440]

Originally Posted by tango-52

I would expect that there is a lot of thorough reading going on to figure out where we go next.

agreed
Every sentence in this thing will have potential effect on the next steps

[yellowfin]

It really is disgusting that they uphold Cruikshank and Presser. What kind of scum do you have to be to like those cases?!?

[ZRX61]

Was this the same thing that stopped gun shows at Antelope Valley Fairgrounds? There hasn't been one here for years....certainly not at the new fairgrounds...

[nat]

Since Alameda won, can they challenge the incorporation ruling? Can the Nordykes refile their lawsuit?

[KWA-S]

Originally Posted by tango-52

I would expect that there is a lot of thorough reading going on to figure out where we go next.

Course, I'm printing it out and reading the whole thing instead of paying attention to my chem lecture. But I think this is a "fair" compromise... Alameda County gets to ban its gun shows, and we get our incorporation. I think it actually really leans in our favor, but in a way to not get punted to the supreme court.

My question is when do we lose our bullet buttons?

[ilbob]

I was thinking about this. Since the county won, they can't appeal the decision. If the decision actually incorporates the 2A, that might well be a good thing.

[tiki]

Yes, it appears that we have incorporation in the 9th, but the Nordykes lost their case.
My thinking, and I am certainly no expert in law, is that since the Nordykes lost but the court indicated incorporation, there isn't a reason for the county to apply for an en banc hearing or a SCOTUS appeal. Alergy medication may be getting to me but it sounds to me like the outcome we wanted for lawsuits is here and the challenges can begin since the court indicated that the 2nd is incorporated.
This may actually wind up becoming a better outcome for us since we don't have the mess of the county asking for a stay in the ruling until the case proceeds to en banc by the 9th or cert by SCOTUS.
I would guess that even if the Nordykes appeal, they wouldn't need to appeal the incorporation portion.
I am very optimistic on this, but of course, will wait to hear fromt those with more experience and legal background than me.

[sorensen440]

Originally Posted by ilbob

I was thinking about this. Since the county won, they can't appeal the decision. If the decision actually incorporates the 2A, that might well be a good thing.

Hmm I didn't think about this

So this may actually be the best choice for gun owners

[DRM6000]

i like the past paragraph (judge gould's concurrance)

[yellowfin]

This is actually the best possible outcome. We get incorporation NOW and the other side can't appeal, as Tiki pointed out quicker than my browser could reload to post.

[DRM6000]

Originally Posted by ilbob

I was thinking about this. Since the county won, they can't appeal the decision. If the decision actually incorporates the 2A, that might well be a good thing.

if that's correct, that is the ideal outcome.

[popeye4]

Originally Posted by xLusi0n

Isn't that better? So the County won't appeal?

It would seem the County won their portion of the case, and one doesn't appeal a victory. The 2nd amendment wasn't part of their case (so says the court in denying the Nordykes the ability to add the 2nd to their compliant), but in saying so, they perhaps acknowledged incorporation of the 2nd amendment. Could this be an un-appealable victory for 2nd amendment?

[DRM6000]

as for the nordyke's loss, will incorporation in some way make it possible for them to bring about another type of suit someday?

[popeye4]

Man, that's amazing how many of us came to the same conclusion simultaneously........

[tango-52]

Originally Posted by DRM6000

if that's correct, that is the ideal outcome.

For us, but not the Nordykes. They took one for the team.