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
  #1041  
Old 02-14-2019, 8:00 PM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 5,447
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Angry

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfwood View Post
If I am reading the en banc process right the Ninth did more than that. This week is the week where the en banc court decided the Young 11 judge panel. That is now locked in if I am right. Now the 5 trump appointees will not be part of the random en banc draw because that draw has already happened. So when Young is unstayed we will be left with a unfavorable left leaning panel. This is unfair both to Mr. Young and to the entire Circuit. As you mentioned the transport case is not even on point to deal with carry so it is unclear how that case deserves a sua sponte stay. The worst part is the parties were not allowed to submit their positions on this issue.
With recent events in Young v Hawaii. Seems like an appropriate time to repost #962 of this thread.

Quote:
Judge Sidney Thomas is just another San Francisco 2A hating Democrat Politician.

Robert's claim that there are no political Judges on the Fed Bench is again proven to be a lie.
Reply With Quote
  #1042  
Old 02-14-2019, 8:47 PM
surfgeorge surfgeorge is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 560
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

As far as I know there is no required maximum amount of time between the announcement of the SCOTUS decision in NYSRPA and the time by which the scheduling of the oral arguments in Young must occur. What if, at any time before those orals are scheduled, or even after they are scheduled but before they take place (as is the current circumstance) SCOTUS accepts another case that might possibly peripherally implicate some potential aspect of an issue in Young? Can the Ninth just keep staying Young as long as any 2A case has been granted cert? I'm not gettin' any warm fuzzies from this...
Reply With Quote
  #1043  
Old 02-14-2019, 8:49 PM
LVSox LVSox is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 10
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pacrat View Post
With recent events in Young v Hawaii. Seems like an appropriate time to repost #962 of this thread.



Sidney Thomas is from Montana, actually.
Reply With Quote
  #1044  
Old 02-14-2019, 8:50 PM
LVSox LVSox is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 10
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by surfgeorge View Post
As far as I know there is no required maximum amount of time between the announcement of the SCOTUS decision in NYSRPA and the time by which the scheduling of the oral arguments in Young must occur. What if, at any time before those orals are scheduled, or even after they are scheduled but before they take place (as is the current circumstance) SCOTUS accepts another case that might possibly peripherally implicate some potential aspect of an issue in Young? Can the Ninth just keep staying Young as long as any 2A case has been granted cert? I'm not gettin' any warm fuzzies from this...
In short, yes. It can stay the case for as long as it wants. It could hear argument and not render a decision for as long as it wants.
Reply With Quote
  #1045  
Old 02-14-2019, 9:53 PM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 5,447
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LVSox View Post
Sidney Thomas is from Montana, actually.
And Obumma is from Kenya/Hawaii. Didn't stop his political corrupt career in Chitcago/DC did it?
Reply With Quote
  #1046  
Old 02-14-2019, 9:55 PM
MarCat MarCat is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 43
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfwood View Post
If I am reading the en banc process right the Ninth did more than that. This week is the week where the en banc court decided the Young 11 judge panel. That is now locked in if I am right. Now the 5 trump appointees will not be part of the random en banc draw because that draw has already happened. So when Young is unstayed we will be left with a unfavorable left leaning panel. This is unfair both to Mr. Young and to the entire Circuit. As you mentioned the transport case is not even on point to deal with carry so it is unclear how that case deserves a sua sponte stay. The worst part is the parties were not allowed to submit their positions on this issue.
I am not surprised, but it is truly stunning.

How is it that the parties are not allowed to submit their respective positions, but the court is asked to to delay to for further briefings to allow more current and complete information about the matter in front of them?
Reply With Quote
  #1047  
Old 02-14-2019, 11:00 PM
champu's Avatar
champu champu is offline
NRA Member, CRPA Member,
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Redondo Beach
Posts: 836
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Offwidth View Post
Interesting delay tactic. Do they know more than we know?
As I said upthread, it’s not a delay tactic, it’s a “who gets the last word” tactic. They want SCOTUS to speak first and then they want to dance around whatever SCOTUS says to acheive their ends. They think they are better than SCOTUS.
Reply With Quote
  #1048  
Old 02-15-2019, 1:29 AM
Phiremin Phiremin is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 87
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by champu View Post
As I said upthread, it’s not a delay tactic, it’s a “who gets the last word” tactic. They want SCOTUS to speak first and then they want to dance around whatever SCOTUS says to acheive their ends. They think they are better than SCOTUS.
Assuming they ever render a decision in this case at all.
If the SCOTUS decision is broad, Hawaii goes back and tweaks their laws slightly to “make them consistent with NYSRPA”.
Ok, we are “must issue”, but you may only carry a single shot flintlock on the 3rd Wednesday of the month not within 3 miles of a school. Oh, and you need $1 million in liability insurance and 90 hours of training (and it will take 2 years to write a curriculum and certify trainers).
...and the 9th circuit declares Young moot because the law on which the case is based changed.

The truth is 1 Supreme Court case isn’t going to matter. States and courts hostile to the 2A will tap dance around any ruling. The only thing that will make a difference is if SCOTUS gets active in smacking down these rulings.
Reply With Quote
  #1049  
Old 02-15-2019, 11:19 PM
Citizen_B's Avatar
Citizen_B Citizen_B is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 960
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thorium View Post
On an optimistic note: The SCOTUS justices friendly to 2A will know about this stay, and that might be one more small incentive for them to rule more broadly in NYSRPA... “you want your guidance, here’s your guidance!”
That’s what I think is the only upside as well. Though I think SCOTUS is going to rule more broadly anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #1050  
Old 02-16-2019, 7:38 AM
njineermike's Avatar
njineermike njineermike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 9,686
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phiremin View Post
Assuming they ever render a decision in this case at all.
If the SCOTUS decision is broad, Hawaii goes back and tweaks their laws slightly to “make them consistent with NYSRPA”.
Ok, we are “must issue”, but you may only carry a single shot flintlock on the 3rd Wednesday of the month not within 3 miles of a school. Oh, and you need $1 million in liability insurance and 90 hours of training (and it will take 2 years to write a curriculum and certify trainers).
...and the 9th circuit declares Young moot because the law on which the case is based changed.

The truth is 1 Supreme Court case isn’t going to matter. States and courts hostile to the 2A will tap dance around any ruling. The only thing that will make a difference is if SCOTUS gets active in smacking down these rulings.
This. It still borders on impossible to obtain a permit to purchase a handgun in DC a decade after Heller.
__________________
NRA lifetime member
2AF Defender member

When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"?

Jon Lovitz: ‘I can’t wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!’

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Dude went full CNN...
Reply With Quote
  #1051  
Old 02-16-2019, 6:45 PM
Califpatriot Califpatriot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Sf bay area
Posts: 1,768
iTrader: 22 / 100%
Angry

Quote:
Originally Posted by njineermike View Post
This. It still borders on impossible to obtain a permit to purchase a handgun in DC a decade after Heller.
Huh? I don't know about purchasing but I thought the ccw process in dc is fairly easy these days.
__________________
In case it wasn't obvious, nothing I write here should be interpreted as legal advice.

Do you have a Kel-Tec P-11? Let me know as I may be interested in buying or trading for it.
Reply With Quote
  #1052  
Old 02-16-2019, 6:47 PM
Califpatriot Califpatriot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Sf bay area
Posts: 1,768
iTrader: 22 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by surfgeorge View Post
As far as I know there is no required maximum amount of time between the announcement of the SCOTUS decision in NYSRPA and the time by which the scheduling of the oral arguments in Young must occur. What if, at any time before those orals are scheduled, or even after they are scheduled but before they take place (as is the current circumstance) SCOTUS accepts another case that might possibly peripherally implicate some potential aspect of an issue in Young? Can the Ninth just keep staying Young as long as any 2A case has been granted cert? I'm not gettin' any warm fuzzies from this...
Scotus can intervene if the Ninth is abusing this.
__________________
In case it wasn't obvious, nothing I write here should be interpreted as legal advice.

Do you have a Kel-Tec P-11? Let me know as I may be interested in buying or trading for it.
Reply With Quote
  #1053  
Old 02-17-2019, 12:00 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 8,712
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

It's late and I'm tired and I can't remember (and there's not a Wiki page re. Young), but did they ask for cert for it? If CA9 thinks it's close enough to NYSRPA to wait for a decision in it before going en banc, maybe use that as an argument that it should be granted cert.?
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #1054  
Old 02-17-2019, 8:32 AM
njineermike's Avatar
njineermike njineermike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 9,686
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Califpatriot View Post
Huh? I don't know about purchasing but I thought the ccw process in dc is fairly easy these days.
You have to be able to buy it before you can carry it. The Heller case wasn't just about carrying, it was about the fact that even getting a license to purchase was pretty much impossible. Research Emily Miller and how long it took her AFTER the Heller decision.
__________________
NRA lifetime member
2AF Defender member

When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"?

Jon Lovitz: ‘I can’t wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!’

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Dude went full CNN...
Reply With Quote
  #1055  
Old 02-17-2019, 10:40 AM
Kukuforguns's Avatar
Kukuforguns Kukuforguns is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Los Angeles County
Posts: 592
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
It's late and I'm tired and I can't remember (and there's not a Wiki page re. Young), but did they ask for cert for it? If CA9 thinks it's close enough to NYSRPA to wait for a decision in it before going en banc, maybe use that as an argument that it should be granted cert.?
Cert has not been requested. The panel decision has been vacated. Seeking cert before there is a circuit decision is highly irregular and requires an issue of "imperative public importance." I can make the case that depriving 10s of millions of people of a fundamental civil liberty essential to defense of life is of imperative public importance, but why bother when Rogers v. Grewal and Gould v. Morgan have already petitioned for certiorari?
__________________
WTB: Magazines for S&W M&P 9c

Last edited by Kukuforguns; 02-17-2019 at 10:44 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #1056  
Old 02-19-2019, 12:18 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 8,712
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kukuforguns View Post
Cert has not been requested. The panel decision has been vacated. Seeking cert before there is a circuit decision is highly irregular and requires an issue of "imperative public importance." I can make the case that depriving 10s of millions of people of a fundamental civil liberty essential to defense of life is of imperative public importance, but why bother when Rogers v. Grewal and Gould v. Morgan have already petitioned for certiorari?
Thanks. If one or both of those cases are granted cert they'll throw a monkey wrench in the Young en banc process....

How would that play out, if we get a decision in one or both of those in our favor after orals in Young en banc? Cut it off at the knees?

ETA: I guess that if Rogers or Gould is granted cert, CA9 will update Young en banc saying it is stayed for not only the NYSRPA decision, but also their decision/s.
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif

Last edited by Paladin; 02-19-2019 at 12:32 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #1057  
Old 02-19-2019, 1:52 AM
SonofWWIIDI's Avatar
SonofWWIIDI SonofWWIIDI is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Santa Clara county
Posts: 20,732
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

So, not a legalese speaker/reader here. So for those like me:

What do the latest rulings/decisions actually mean?

Does the current standing of this case, and/or its prospective outcome, actually help us, or hurt us?

__________________
•=iii=<(
🎺

Dear autocorrect, I'm really getting tired of your shirt!
Quote:
Originally Posted by LugerDevil666 View Post
No more stupid threads. you have my word
Quote:
Originally Posted by LugerDevil666 View Post
Rule 1 I'll admit I'm a jerk when I post stupid thread.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmut Shmacher View Post
I'll do the picking.. Name wise .. if you don't mind...
Helmut Shmacher- Formerly lugerdevil666
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 3:25 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.