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
  #241  
Old 09-07-2022, 7:32 PM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,718
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
You’re stuck pre NY v Bruen in the head.

How come you didn’t comment on a possible Writ of Mandamus? Do you know what that means?
No, I'm stuck in the 9th circuit which doesn't want to rule per Bruen. I'm a realist.

yes I know what Mandamus means, it's not a point that matters.
Reply With Quote
  #242  
Old 09-07-2022, 7:36 PM
strakill's Avatar
strakill strakill is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: I'm an Athol
Posts: 1,276
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
Or, they get it to district, fix it right and appeals are denied.

Or, they sit on it and a Writ of Mandamus is requested to act accordingly. We don’t really know yet. You can speculate but the SCOTUS is primed for telling obtuse courts to knock it off, they said what they said and they don’t want more 2A cases.
And how exactly is SCOTUS going to enforce? NY and CA already are thumbing their nose at them.

Who is going to make them follow SCOTUS rulings? We are long past the rule of law.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by superhondaz50 View Post
I should note, I have a hookup..., just trying to determine the cost to put it in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by beerman View Post
...He comes out while I'm at work to **** the wife..I shall name him Sancho.
Reply With Quote
  #243  
Old 09-07-2022, 7:39 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 19,361
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abinsinia View Post
No, I'm stuck in the 9th circuit which doesn't want to rule per Bruen. I'm a realist.

yes I know what Mandamus means, it's not a point that matters.
So, you think that possible sanctions from the SCOTUS means nothing to a subordinate judge?

Did you see how fast Benitez acted on this?
Reply With Quote
  #244  
Old 09-07-2022, 7:41 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 19,361
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by strakill View Post
And how exactly is SCOTUS going to enforce? NY and CA already are thumbing their nose at them.

Who is going to make them follow SCOTUS rulings? We are long past the rule of law.
I’m not going to splain this to you. I suggest you study up a bit on how this stuff works.
Reply With Quote
  #245  
Old 09-07-2022, 7:50 PM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,718
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
So, you think that possible sanctions from the SCOTUS means nothing to a subordinate judge?

Did you see how fast Benitez acted on this?
You haven't followed the other cases. They are not moving fast. i don't think the 9th cares at all for SCOTUS .. They never have, that's why they entirely ignored the Heller case.
Reply With Quote
  #246  
Old 09-07-2022, 7:57 PM
Lanejsl Lanejsl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 379
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
I’m not going to splain this to you. I suggest you study up a bit on how this stuff works.
I think you need the splaining to pal. Polling shows that half the country doesn't believe SCOTUS is legitimate. If you think that the 9th is concerned about a reprimand from the high court then you haven't been paying attention. The only reason Benitez is fast tracking is because he's pro 2A and he isn't an activist judge.

Last edited by Lanejsl; 09-07-2022 at 7:58 PM.. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote
  #247  
Old 09-07-2022, 7:58 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 19,361
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abinsinia View Post
You haven't followed the other cases. They are not moving fast. i don't think the 9th cares at all for SCOTUS .. They never have, that's why they entirely ignored the Heller case.
They didn’t ignore the Heller case, they found a loop hole in a case that used the words “especially in the home” which limited carry cases from progressing. It didn’t come close to addressing what Thomas wrote.

The antis literally are now using King George laws to make a point in their cases.

When it comes to the Ninth, I’m pretty sure Justice Kagan has correspondence to the Ninth on what this all means
Reply With Quote
  #248  
Old 09-07-2022, 8:28 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 19,361
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanejsl View Post
I think you need the splaining to pal. Polling shows that half the country doesn't believe SCOTUS is legitimate. If you think that the 9th is concerned about a reprimand from the high court then you haven't been paying attention. The only reason Benitez is fast tracking is because he's pro 2A and he isn't an activist judge.
Let me know when you have something to offer that’s actually not claiming you know something when all you’re really doing is parroting “all judge bad”
Reply With Quote
  #249  
Old 09-07-2022, 9:45 PM
johncage johncage is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 993
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

barring arrest orders for contempt of court and national guard deployment, the 9th will not budge
Reply With Quote
  #250  
Old 09-07-2022, 9:57 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 19,361
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by johncage View Post
barring arrest orders for contempt of court and national guard deployment, the 9th will not budge
Yet, CA Sheriffs are issuing CCWs all over the state and SB 918 failed with a supermajority
Reply With Quote
  #251  
Old 09-08-2022, 1:28 PM
ronlglock's Avatar
ronlglock ronlglock is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,602
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
Yet, CA Sheriffs are issuing CCWs all over the state and SB 918 failed with a supermajority

By one vote.
__________________


NRA/USCCA/DOJ instructor, NRA CRSO, Journalist
Reply With Quote
  #252  
Old 09-08-2022, 2:39 PM
moleculo moleculo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 941
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abinsinia View Post
I don't think that can be known, they don't tell you who the en banc panel is unless there is hearing, and this had no hearing.
https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fir...pdf?1662567526

There was no en banc panel. This was remanded by a typical 3 judge appeals panel. The en banc appeal was denied. They also didn't issue any reasoning for the remand - they just did it. It could have been one faulting reasoning (the hunting thing) or something else the panel felt was inconsistent with Bruen.
__________________
Quote:
Those acting in the public interest assume obligations of accountability and transparency. Retroactively redefining goals while claiming yet refusing to disclose some "master plan" is just the opposite. So is viciously trashing anyone who questions your judgment. -navyinrwanda
Reply With Quote
  #253  
Old 09-08-2022, 2:41 PM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,718
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moleculo View Post
https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fir...pdf?1662567526

There was no en banc panel. This was remanded by a typical 3 judge appeals panel. The en banc appeal was denied. They also didn't issue any reasoning for the remand - they just did it. It could have been one faulting reasoning (the hunting thing) or something else the panel felt was inconsistent with Bruen.
As I said before I don't think we can know what influence the whole court had in that case. Something clearly changed on that panel.
Reply With Quote
  #254  
Old 09-08-2022, 3:08 PM
moleculo moleculo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 941
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abinsinia View Post
As I said before I don't think we can know what influence the whole court had in that case. Something clearly changed on that panel.
Yes we do know what influence the "whole court" had. The "whole" court was the 3 judge panel and that was it. There was no en banc panel selected to influence anything.
__________________
Quote:
Those acting in the public interest assume obligations of accountability and transparency. Retroactively redefining goals while claiming yet refusing to disclose some "master plan" is just the opposite. So is viciously trashing anyone who questions your judgment. -navyinrwanda
Reply With Quote
  #255  
Old 09-08-2022, 4:15 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 19,361
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ronlglock View Post
By one vote.
Ya, so? In California! Clearly NY v Bruen has had an effect on some politicians. That’s how we start winning.

A win is a win regardless of how many points or in this case votes
Reply With Quote
  #256  
Old 09-08-2022, 4:22 PM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,718
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moleculo View Post
Yes we do know what influence the "whole court" had. The "whole" court was the 3 judge panel and that was it. There was no en banc panel selected to influence anything.
They would have to provide the request for en banc to the whole court, because that's what was requested. So I don't agree, the whole court was involved in this.
Reply With Quote
  #257  
Old 09-08-2022, 5:08 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 19,361
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abinsinia View Post
They would have to provide the request for en banc to the whole court, because that's what was requested. So I don't agree, the whole court was involved in this.
Reply With Quote
  #258  
Old 09-09-2022, 9:39 AM
ASD1's Avatar
ASD1 ASD1 is offline
1/2 BANNED
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Burlingame
Posts: 1,783
iTrader: 111 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
some just don't read do they Tape
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #259  
Old 12-10-2023, 8:21 AM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,718
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I haven't been watching this one but it seems a PI decision was released,

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fir...pdf?1702080910

Reply With Quote
  #260  
Old 12-10-2023, 8:28 AM
Mute's Avatar
Mute Mute is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Diamond Bar
Posts: 8,091
iTrader: 40 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abinsinia View Post
I haven't been watching this one but it seems a PI decision was released,

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fir...pdf?1702080910

This fool judge is still trying to push interest balancing.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member
NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle & Refuse To Be A Victim Instructor

American Marksman Training Group
Visit our American Marksman Facebook Page
Diamond Bar CCW Facebook Page


NRA Memberships at Discounted fee
Reply With Quote
  #261  
Old 12-10-2023, 1:30 PM
Drivedabizness's Avatar
Drivedabizness Drivedabizness is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Nevada City, CA
Posts: 2,587
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

UTTER Bullsh*t
__________________
Proud CGN Contributor
USMC Pistol Team Alumni - Distinguished Pistol Shot
Owner of multiple Constitutionally protected tools
Reply With Quote
  #262  
Old 12-10-2023, 3:23 PM
nick nick is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 19,128
iTrader: 168 / 100%
Default

A judge in another circuit (WV, I believe) just held the opposite based on Heller and Bruen.
__________________
DiaHero Foundation - helping people manage diabetes. Sending diabetes supplies to Ukraine now, any help is appreciated.

DDR AK furniture and Norinco M14 parts kit: https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1756292
Reply With Quote
  #263  
Old 12-10-2023, 10:00 PM
AlmostHeaven AlmostHeaven is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Virginia
Posts: 3,480
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nick View Post
A judge in another circuit (WV, I believe) just held the opposite based on Heller and Bruen.
Circuit splits are good for moving issues up to the Supreme Court.
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 8:39 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, 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 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy