Rupp v Becerra (AWCA): 6-28-22 9th Vacates and remands to TC/DC

[OleCuss]

Originally Posted by rplaw

I sold out a long time before I ever went to law school. I quit High School for a better education in the school of hard knocks, never went to college for an undergrad, and managed to bamboozle the admin at my law college that an almost perfect score on the LSAT was good enough to let me to pay them lots of money to sit in the back of the classroom and heckle the instructors.

A lemming is something I most definitely am not.

I'm just loving the attitude you exhibit in this post. Excellent!

[rplaw]

Originally Posted by OleCuss

I'm just loving the attitude you exhibit in this post. Excellent!

It's called irreverence. Under that theory, the world is my oyster - except I'm allergic to molluscs.

[rplaw]

Originally Posted by moleculo

For those that don't have the time or ability to read and process both Heller & Bruen, IMO this is the best Cliff's note version I've seen so far.

The problem is that those with an agenda (both those who are in league with the banning as well as those who believe in only CC) won't do what Bruen says to do.

Instead they hunt for sentences to quote rather than actually APPLY THE TEST. Basically, they want the weatherman to tell them it's raining rather than look through the window.

[BAJ475]

Originally Posted by rplaw

The problem is that those with an agenda (both those who are in league with the banning as well as those who believe in only CC) won't do what Bruen says to do.

Instead they hunt for sentences to quote rather than actually APPLY THE TEST. Basically, they want the weatherman to tell them it's raining rather than look through the window.

But who does not have an agenda? And keep in mind that it is an adversarial system. It just fantastic that Justice Thomas tilted the playing field in our favor.

[TruOil]

Originally Posted by rplaw

TBasically, they want the weatherman to tell them it's raining rather than look through the window.

What, you didn't quote Dylan??? "you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"

[abinsinia]

Judge Staton is slow. She's had this case for a month or so and no movement meanwhile Benitez already requested briefs days after the case was remanded.

[JiuJitsu]

Judge Staton must be trying to avoid the inevitable. Which is pretty sad considering she just needs to follow the Constitution and the guidance just handed down by SCOTUS. That's a little too much to ask, apparently.

[ar15barrels]

Originally Posted by abinsinia

Judge Staton is slow. She's had this case for a month or so and no movement meanwhile Benitez already requested briefs days after the case was remanded.

She probably scheduled it for September.









of 2024.

[rplaw]

Originally Posted by BAJ475

But who does not have an agenda? And keep in mind that it is an adversarial system. It just fantastic that Justice Thomas tilted the playing field in our favor.

Every person has an agenda. However, the Court is supposed to be neutral and without bias or favor.

Our adversarial system is there to flush out the truth, not hide it. Currently the 9th is doing everything they can to not only hide the truth but to also deny that there is even such a thing as truth.

[curtisfong]

Originally Posted by abinsinia

Judge Staton is slow. She's had this case for a month or so and no movement meanwhile Benitez already requested briefs days after the case was remanded.

She seems to literally believe she was put on this earth to put her personal opinion in the guise of "public safety" above the law.

I have no doubt she thinks she is doing the "right" thing.

Too bad she's a judge, and not a political pundit. If only she would take that responsibility seriously.

[Scott Connors]

Originally Posted by ar15barrels

She probably scheduled it for September.









of 2024.

That soon?

[kenl]

She's probably waiting for Miller to make this lawsuit go away. That way she can claim to her friends that she's still an anti 2a activist at heart, and will still get invited to those high powered cocktail parties

[IVC]

It's going to take time to clean up the mess from the past 14 years since Heller. During that time the courts found a way to subvert the plain text of the 2A and they aren't going to just make a U-turn. At least not proactively, some might have to be dragged kicking and screaming.

But the more they obstruct, the stronger is the case for SCOTUS to take another case or even to intervene and stop the insubordination.

[f80vm]

Scheduling order: https://storage.courtlistener.com/re...6380.131.0.pdf

[abinsinia]

Summer next year gives Benitez plenty of time to clean this up for Josephine.

[curtisfong]

Reminder: Staton is hostile to the right. I don't expect we will win the first round. She will delay as long as she can.

[homelessdude]

Looks like early May? That is a good thing in my opinion. It gives Benitez plenty of time to do it right. Let the lib judges watch and learn how it's done.

[ar15barrels]

Originally Posted by abinsinia

Summer next year gives Benitez plenty of time to clean this up for Josephine.

Originally Posted by curtisfong

Reminder: Staton is hostile to the right. I don't expect we will win the first round. She will delay as long as she can.

Let's say we have a pro-gun decision on Miller in district court before Staton rules on Rupp.
Are district court precedents from the same district supposed to be followed by another district court judge within the same district when the same type of case is being adjudicated in the same district?

[FreemanG]

Originally Posted by ar15barrels

Let's say we have a pro-gun decision on Miller in district court before Staton rules on Rupp.
Are district court precedents from the same district supposed to be followed by another district court judge within the same district when the same type of case is being adjudicated in the same district?

Im pretty sure only higher courts set precedent but I could be wrong.

[homelessdude]

I would think that if Benitez rules it's unconstitutional on the same law before she did her case would be moot. I'm no lawyer so maybe wait for a profesional opinion.

[curtisfong]

Originally Posted by homelessdude

I would think that if Benitez rules it's unconstitutional on the same law before she did her case would be moot. I'm no lawyer so maybe wait for a profesional opinion.

People like Josephine Staton don't think strategically IMO; she's a true believer. She'll do whatever she can to make *her* case come out the way she wants it to, within her scope. And within that scope, I think delay is her most likely ideology based approach. Also, not a lawyer, so I don't pretend to know what the full strategic calculus would be anyway.

[Luciansulla]

Rupp is a suit based on the Roberti-Roos list, while Miller specifically targets the features ban.

[Bhobbs]

Wasn’t Miller expanded to cover the whole AWB?

[alowercaseq]

Originally Posted by IVC

It's going to take time to clean up the mess from the past 14 years since Heller. During that time the courts found a way to subvert the plain text of the 2A and they aren't going to just make a U-turn. At least not proactively, some might have to be dragged kicking and screaming.

But the more they obstruct, the stronger is the case for SCOTUS to take another case or even to intervene and stop the insubordination.

Everyone should keep in mind what is behind all this. These people are taking their orders from global governance folks. In that bigger picture, the US constitution is considered WRONG, and they will not stop. After each supreme court win there will be another decade of shenanigans, until everyone that opposes is dead.

The ONLY WAY is to win the ideological battle. To convince EVERYONE that our position is the morally, ethically and socially superior one. Until then, this will not stop, it will not get better. It will get worse.

I don't think that will happen before a democide that will make all past genocides look like amateur killing sprees.

[homelessdude]

Boy that cheered me up...................not

[okkleiner]

UPDATE from 2/24/23:
Order Granting Joint Stipulation to Modify Discovery and Pretrial Dates:

Good cause appearing therefor, the Court hereby grants the parties’ Joint
Stipulation and Request to Modify Discovery and Pretrial Deadlines (Doc. 133) and ORDERS the following modifications to the scheduling order entered on October 20, 2022 (Doc. 131):

Expert Discovery Cut-off: March 17, 2023
Last Day to File Daubert Motions: March 24, 2023
Last Day to File Dispositive Motions: May 26, 2023