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 09-24-2009, 5:06 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 BREAKING Nordyke: Order entered

All,

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals just issued the following order:
Quote:
Filed order (ALEX KOZINSKI): Submission is vacated pending the Supreme Court’s disposition of Maloney
v. Rice, No. 08-1592, McDonald v. City of Chicago, No. 08-1521, and National
Rifle Ass’n of Am., Inc. v. City of Chicago, No. 08-1497. [7074146] (AF)
We are now officially on hold in Nordyke until the Supreme Court speaks.

-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 09-24-2009, 5:08 PM
PolishMike's Avatar
PolishMike PolishMike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Tracy
Posts: 6,054
iTrader: 26 / 96%
Default

This good or bad?

Figured this was coming after listening to oral.
__________________
Tracy Rifle and Pistol
7601 W 11th St
Tracy Ca 95304
209 833-9100
For sales Questions please email Sales@tracyrifleandpistol.com
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:08 PM
sfwdiy's Avatar
sfwdiy sfwdiy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Hollywood
Posts: 2,137
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Damnit.

--B
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:12 PM
Can'thavenuthingood's Avatar
Can'thavenuthingood Can'thavenuthingood is offline
C3 Leader
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lemoore
Posts: 5,720
iTrader: 141 / 100%
Default

The newest Justice is Sotormayer.

Vick
__________________


"Nobody ever defended anything successfully, there is only attack and attack and attack some more." (George Patton)

Calguns T-shirts, hats and stickers

CALGUNS.NET logo stickers and patches (3 inch) are here

Picnic Time
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:12 PM
sfwdiy's Avatar
sfwdiy sfwdiy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Hollywood
Posts: 2,137
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PolishMike View Post
This good or bad?

Figured this was coming after listening to oral.
It means the 9th punted. They're gonna let SCOTUS issue a ruling in one of the above cases before they say anything.

--B
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:12 PM
Dirk Tungsten's Avatar
Dirk Tungsten Dirk Tungsten is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: the basement
Posts: 1,311
iTrader: 34 / 100%
Default

Gene, for those of us not familiar with the process, what's the time frame for this look like?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:13 PM
sfwdiy's Avatar
sfwdiy sfwdiy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Hollywood
Posts: 2,137
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Can'thavenuthingood View Post
The newest Justice is Sotormayer.

Vick
Doesn't really affect anything. The makeup of the court is the same; the Heller 5 are still in place.

--B
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:14 PM
marshaul's Avatar
marshaul marshaul is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 179
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sfwdiy View Post
Doesn't really affect anything. The makeup of the court is the same; the Heller 5 are still in place.

--B
This. I get tired of implications to the contrary.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:15 PM
sfwdiy's Avatar
sfwdiy sfwdiy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Hollywood
Posts: 2,137
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
This. I get tired of implications to the contrary.
You may end up falling asleep the way things are going.

--B
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:16 PM
tango-52's Avatar
tango-52 tango-52 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego County
Posts: 780
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

So everything is now on hold until next June!
__________________
“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.” - Lazarus Long
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:16 PM
Telperion's Avatar
Telperion Telperion is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 537
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Why did they schedule oral arguments now if they were going to defer to SCOTUS?
__________________
NFA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:16 PM
Blackhawk556's Avatar
Blackhawk556 Blackhawk556 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: FresNO, Ca
Posts: 3,884
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

and the waiting begins again

is it safe to say they are too scared to make their own decision?
__________________
CZ 75 SP-01 ROCKS!
"If guns kill people, do pencils misspell words?"
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:17 PM
dantodd dantodd is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Carlos
Posts: 9,361
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

no surprise. We can almost certain assume that Pena will join the 9th and Sykes in waiting for SCOTUS to decide the issue.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:18 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 9,197
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Gene, when you get a chance, could you interact w/my earlier thread at:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=225407

Thanks.
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:20 PM
loather loather is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: escondido, ca
Posts: 910
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

The 9th circuit is wussing out. Damnit.

Well, at least we have the Supreme Court on our side (for now ...)

Although, Ginsburg just went into the hospital with a severe iron deficiency. She's old, and she has cancer. I'm not sure she has a lot left in her ... Then again, she is anti-2A. So, if The Obamesiah appoints another anti-2A judge to the court, we're still in the same boat. *sigh*
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:20 PM
sorensen440's Avatar
sorensen440 sorensen440 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sonoma
Posts: 8,602
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Telperion View Post
Why did they schedule oral arguments now if they were going to defer to SCOTUS?
It looks to me to be a delay tactic
__________________
"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
  #17  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:21 PM
dantodd dantodd is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Carlos
Posts: 9,361
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

um.... has SCOTUS granted cert to an incorporation case?
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:23 PM
HowardW56's Avatar
HowardW56 HowardW56 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,888
iTrader: 21 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
All,

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals just issued the following order:


We are now officially on hold in Nordyke until the Supreme Court speaks.

-Gene
And there is no guarantee that the Supreme Court will take the Grant Cert..

I guess they could have certified it and punted...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:25 PM
bsim's Avatar
bsim bsim is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Ventura Co.
Posts: 897
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Well good thing they decided to go en banc then, huh?
__________________
NRA Life Member
SAF Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:26 PM
nick nick is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 18,694
iTrader: 159 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by loather View Post
The 9th circuit is wussing out. Damnit.

Well, at least we have the Supreme Court on our side (for now ...)

Although, Ginsburg just went into the hospital with a severe iron deficiency. She's old, and she has cancer. I'm not sure she has a lot left in her ... Then again, she is anti-2A. So, if The Obamesiah appoints another anti-2A judge to the court, we're still in the same boat. *sigh*
Not quite. We get a YOUNGER anti judge.
__________________
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson
"Thou shalt not interfere with the Second Amendment rights of "law-abiding" citizens who want AK-47s only to protect hearth and home." - Paul Helmke finally gets it :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJgunguy24 View Post
Some people are so open minded, their brains have fallen out.


Selling a bunch of C&R and other guns here: https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1542770
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:26 PM
sfwdiy's Avatar
sfwdiy sfwdiy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Hollywood
Posts: 2,137
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantodd View Post
um.... has SCOTUS granted cert to an incorporation case?
Not that I'm aware of.

--B
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:28 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

Here is a copy of the order.

Though this is frustrating on a time line basis this may very well be a good outcome. It certainly beats the 9th sitting on the case until SCOTUS rules. Now there is an odd kind of circuit split in which the court doesn't feel that it can incorporate but yet may want to strike the law.

-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
  #23  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:32 PM
Hunt's Avatar
Hunt Hunt is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,029
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sfwdiy View Post
Doesn't really affect anything. The makeup of the court is the same; the Heller 5 are still in place.

--B
by one heartbeat
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:33 PM
elenius's Avatar
elenius elenius is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Redwood City
Posts: 772
iTrader: 24 / 100%
Default

So if/when SCOTUS rules for incorporation, will this same en banc panel automatically reconvene and go on from there?
__________________
NRA Member
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:35 PM
woodsman's Avatar
woodsman woodsman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: East Bay, California
Posts: 569
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I understand little about the law process but I find it disconcerting that they can punt, essentially putting things on hold.

Is there no obligation for them to decide?
__________________
"The Right Of The People To
Keep And Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed"

Nuff Said....!
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:38 PM
tube_ee tube_ee is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 158
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Gene...

Since Kozinski was the judge most strongly on our side at the initial appellate review, at least as I understand it, what (if anything) does it mean that the order is in his name?

IOW, did he do this, and if so, why?

--Shannon
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:41 PM
HowardW56's Avatar
HowardW56 HowardW56 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,888
iTrader: 21 / 100%
Default

With the submission vacated, would there be oral argument again if and when SCOTUS issues an opinion
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:41 PM
loather loather is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: escondido, ca
Posts: 910
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nick View Post
Not quite. We get a YOUNGER anti judge.
Good point. Maybe whoever he appoints will be a closet supporter -- hey, pigs have flown before, right?
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:42 PM
sholling's Avatar
sholling sholling is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,345
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

So basically their minds were made up before anybody spoke a word.
__________________
"Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else." --FREDERIC BASTIAT--

Proud Life Member: National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation.

Life Member: California Rifle & Pistol Association
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:44 PM
loather loather is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: escondido, ca
Posts: 910
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tube_ee View Post
Since Kozinski was the judge most strongly on our side at the initial appellate review, at least as I understand it, what (if anything) does it mean that the order is in his name?

IOW, did he do this, and if so, why?
It's in Kozinski's name because he was the sitting Chief Justice on this en banc hearing. He's filing it on behalf of the entire panel.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:44 PM
Casual_Shooter's Avatar
Casual_Shooter Casual_Shooter is offline
Ban Hammer Avoidance Team
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Did you notice how far over I've moved this part of my info? You should try it, it's fun.
Posts: 10,507
iTrader: 54 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by woodsman View Post
I understand little about the law process but I find it disconcerting that they can punt, essentially putting things on hold.

Is there no obligation for them to decide?
I know less than you, I'm sure, but it appears to me that the judges are using the legal process to delay making a decision until other people make a decision so that they have a basis for their decision.

I don't really understand much of what goes on with these types of things, but it sure feels like I'm trying to cook something quickly in a microwave but it's instructions say to slow-cook in a crock pot.....
__________________
Guns, dogs and home alarms. Opponents are all of a sudden advocates once their personal space is violated.

"Those who cannot remember the posts are condemned to repeat them"

I wish I had a dollar for every time someone used a cliché

Why is it all the funny stuff happens to comedians?
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:45 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

It's possible that there would be another oral argument again but I somewhat doubt it. Kozinski is Chief Justice so you should read nothing into him issuing this beyond that this is a standard process of the court.

-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
  #33  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:49 PM
woodsman's Avatar
woodsman woodsman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: East Bay, California
Posts: 569
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Casual_Shooter View Post
I know less than you, I'm sure, but it appears to me that the judges are using the legal process to delay making a decision until other people make a decision so that they have a basis for their decision.

I don't really understand much of what goes on with these types of things, but it sure feels like I'm trying to cook something quickly in a microwave but it's instructions say to slow-cook in a crock pot.....
I guess the oath they take to uphold the constitution has no time frame requirement.
__________________
"The Right Of The People To
Keep And Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed"

Nuff Said....!
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 09-24-2009, 5:57 PM
HowardW56's Avatar
HowardW56 HowardW56 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,888
iTrader: 21 / 100%
Default

I find it curious that would bother rather than just sit on it and wait...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 09-24-2009, 6:00 PM
Kid Stanislaus Kid Stanislaus is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Oakdale, CA
Posts: 4,420
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by woodsman View Post
I understand little about the law process but I find it disconcerting that they can punt, essentially putting things on hold.

Is there no obligation for them to decide?
You'd prefer, perhaps, a more ACTIVIST court?
__________________
Things usually turn out best for those who make the best of how things turn out.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 09-24-2009, 6:01 PM
woodsman's Avatar
woodsman woodsman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: East Bay, California
Posts: 569
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kid Stanislaus View Post
You'd prefer, perhaps, a more ACTIVIST court?
No, just enforce the constitution.
__________________
"The Right Of The People To
Keep And Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed"

Nuff Said....!
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 09-24-2009, 6:03 PM
elSquid's Avatar
elSquid elSquid is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Left coast.
Posts: 10,240
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardW56 View Post
And there is no guarantee that the Supreme Court will take the Grant Cert..
OTOH, the 9th is now explicitly waiting on a ruling from the Supreme Court, which should give further impetus to said Court to take up the issue...?

-- Michael
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 09-24-2009, 6:09 PM
BroncoBob's Avatar
BroncoBob BroncoBob is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Tracy, CA
Posts: 6,018
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Darn, well looks like I'll be another year older when this comes down.
__________________

NRA MEMBER

Originally Posted by ar15barrels
Unscrew the lid. There is a foil seal there.
Pull the seal off and screw the lid back on.
Then you can squeeze the mustard and it will come out of the bottle..

Liberals are termites eating at the foundation of our constitution.
Michael Reagan
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 09-24-2009, 6:12 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 38,841
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Looks like the conference to decide on cert for McDonald/NRA will happen on Tuesday.

If cert is granted, args before June 2010, I think.

Listening to the recording, seems like the panel was interested in waiting for SCOTUS, and here we are.
__________________
No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems - of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.
- Thomas Sowell
I've been saying that for years ...

There is no value at all complaining or analyzing or reading tea leaves to decide what these bills really mean or actually do; any bill with a chance to pass will be bad for gun owners.

The details only count after the Governor signs the bills.


Gregg Easterbrook’s “Law of Doomsaying”: Predict catastrophe no later than ten years hence but no sooner than five years away — soon enough to terrify people but distant enough that they will not remember that you were wrong.


Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 09-24-2009, 6:22 PM
MudCamper's Avatar
MudCamper MudCamper is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sebastopol
Posts: 4,341
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Default

Why did they even bother with these oral arguments? Did they have to in order to in order to hold for SCOTUS?

Well, it was still interesting though. And I did get to sit right next to the powerhouse 2A panel of Don, Don, Alan, and Chuck!
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 3:19 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.