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 > National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion Discuss national gun rights and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #441  
Old 05-25-2020, 10:53 PM
tenemae's Avatar
tenemae tenemae is offline
Code Monkey
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: ҚФꙦꙦѤ ꙆꚈҊԂ ô
Posts: 1,287
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhobbs View Post
All it means is SCOTUS doesnít consider the 2A a priority. They donít care that lower courts are ignoring Heller and McDonald. The 2A isnít even a secondary right. Itís tertiary at best.
Especially with all the covid stuff working its way up now, this red-headed step-child is going to get shoved further in the closet. See y'all in 2025?
Reply With Quote
  #442  
Old 05-26-2020, 10:40 AM
Offwidth Offwidth is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 857
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Well, nice to them not to make us read orders.
Reply With Quote
  #443  
Old 05-26-2020, 10:43 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 9,757
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kuug View Post
The fact the cases were already relisted without even waiting for Tuesday is not a good sign, not at all
What will be interesting is if they do NOT relist any of the 2nd A cases this Friday. Does that mean they're through discussing them, they're done with them and ready to deny and/or release opinions?

__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

240+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #444  
Old 05-26-2020, 12:19 PM
kuug's Avatar
kuug kuug is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 489
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
What will be interesting is if they do NOT relist any of the 2nd A cases this Friday. Does that mean they're through discussing them, they're done with them and ready to deny and/or release opinions?

they relisted Guedes v ATF right up until cert was denied
Reply With Quote
  #445  
Old 05-26-2020, 12:40 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 9,757
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Good overview article by CNN getting the uninformed masses up to speed.

Quote:
10 cases that could change how the Supreme Court looks at the Second Amendment

Posted May 26, 2020 7:20 a.m. EDT

By Jamie Ehrlich, CNN

CNN — The Supreme Court's solid conservative majority could soon choose to take up its first major Second Amendment case in nearly a decade, positioning the court to override state laws established to limit the availability and accessibility of some firearms and when they can be carried in public.

There are 10 cases waiting before the justices, and it only takes the agreement of four of the nine justices to vote to hear a case -- a low hurdle for the right-leaning Supreme Court seemingly eager to make a broad Second Amendment ruling.

<snip>

While all sides are watching closely, there's no guarantees with anything involving the Supreme Court, however.

"When the court will take another gun case, what it will be, and what the court will decide is all guesswork," said Jonathan Lowy, chief counsel and vice president of pro-gun safety organization Brady: United Against Gun Violence. "They could grant cert in these cases as soon this week, or soon after, and we will be ready to ensure that Americans' right to life is not infringed upon by the gun industry."
More at: https://www.wral.com/10-cases-that-c...ment/19114233/
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

240+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif

Last edited by Paladin; 05-26-2020 at 2:31 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #446  
Old 05-26-2020, 12:42 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 9,757
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kuug View Post
they relisted Guedes v ATF right up until cert was denied
Right. So, like I said, if some/all of them do NOT get relisted on Friday for next Thursday's conference, it could mean something will happen to them on Monday.
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

240+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif

Last edited by Paladin; 05-26-2020 at 2:32 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #447  
Old 05-26-2020, 12:58 PM
OleCuss OleCuss is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 6,207
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Too much pessimism.

If the conservatives on the SCOTUS didn't want to take one of the cases and issue a decision? It'd be simplicity itself - just deny cert to everything and they're done.

Since they haven't denied cert it is most logical to suggest they are seriously considering granting cert to one or more of the held 2A cases.

I frankly would not expect a grant of cert until about their last opportunity in this session. They have multiple cases and are probably effectively writing potential decisions for the various cases and for combinations of cases.

And since they aren't going to hear arguments in the case(s) until the next session (and I'm betting not until the next calendar year in order to avoid political implications) there is simply no need to grant cert at this time.

The 5 can work out which is the best case (or cases), determine whether they need to combine two into one, write possible decisions and bargain amongst themselves over what will work best for the balance they are aiming for.

I'd not expect a grant of cert for several weeks. Maybe it'll happen sooner but I'd not bet on it.
__________________
CGN's token life-long teetotaling vegetarian. Not qualified to give any legal opinion so pay attention at your own risk.
Reply With Quote
  #448  
Old 05-26-2020, 1:08 PM
Offwidth Offwidth is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 857
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OleCuss View Post
The 5 can work out which is the best case (or cases), determine whether they need to combine two into one, write possible decisions and bargain amongst themselves over what will work best for the balance they are aiming for.
The 4 are trying to figure out which one they can get Roberts onboard and at what cost of decision dilution.
Reply With Quote
  #449  
Old 05-26-2020, 1:35 PM
meanspartan meanspartan is online now
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 56
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

CNN is wrong that it is a slam dunk because you only need 4 for cert.

Sure, if the 4 voting for cert do not care about the outcome, then it WOULD be easy to grant cert and let the chips fall where they may. But if they are worried Roberts is going to screw them, then they effectively need him on board too in order to not risk an antigun precedent.

If all the 2A cases are dismissed, it is effectively proof that Roberts has flipped, or that he does not want to expand gun rights at all past the watered down protections Heller gave us.
Reply With Quote
  #450  
Old 05-26-2020, 2:25 PM
OleCuss OleCuss is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 6,207
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Offwidth View Post
The 4 are trying to figure out which one they can get Roberts onboard and at what cost of decision dilution.
I think that is very possible. Oddly, Thomas could also be the hang-up.

Remember that Thomas doesn't always think about things the same way other conservatives do. In McDonald he did not join the majority opinion but wrote a concurrence.

We really do not know if there is a particular Justice who is being particularly difficult for the other 4 to bring on board or if it is a general consensus-building exercise (or something else).

If I were to make an guess (and understand that it is a guess), Roberts will want a decision mandating a certain level of scrutiny and then let the lower courts fight it out and then come back to SCOTUS if needed. The other four will want a more "broad" ruling. Note that mandating strict scrutiny is sort of a narrow ruling but it does have broad implications. I think the others may want to move things a bit beyond scrutiny and give the lower courts even less leeway than "strict scrutiny" might allow them.

But the truth is that we don't know just what they are discussing or why. It's even possible that one or more justices knows the level of perfidy which would cause Roberts and Kavanaugh to vote for a decision not only on 2A matters but on mootness as well. So they might try for a case they think may be subject to an attempt to moot and pounce on that.

For that matter, there is some pretty egregious governmental stomping on freedom in the name of Covid-19. They'll try to moot the cases which have arisen from that - and that could even increase the interest in a case which might require re-addressing mootness.

It's fun to speculate, but it's speculation.
__________________
CGN's token life-long teetotaling vegetarian. Not qualified to give any legal opinion so pay attention at your own risk.
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 3:58 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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 2002-2020, 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.
Tactical Pants Tactical Boots Tactical Gear Military Boots 5.11 Tactical