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
  #1  
Old 05-16-2023, 2:35 PM
pacrat pacrat is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 10,220
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Arrow NRA SUIT AGAINST MARYLAND

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/nr...32960a39&ei=46

Quote:
FIRST ON FOX: The NRA?s lobbying arm filed a lawsuit against the state of Maryland Tuesday after Democratic Gov. Wes Moore signed a pair of gun control bills that the NRA says will prevent law-abiding citizens from carrying for self-defense purposes.

Moore signed SB 1 and HB 824 into law Tuesday after Democratic lawmakers in the state championed the bills as ones that would cut back on crime and violence. The laws further restrict where residents can legally carry, while making the application processes to obtain a carry license more burdensome.

The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) filed its lawsuit on Tuesday, Fox News exclusively learned, citing the measures as "illegal under the U.S. Constitution."

"Here are some sad facts: the mere mention of the word Baltimore invokes an immediate vision of a violent, unsafe city. That's because of the woeful lack of prosecution of violent criminals in the state. It is vital for law-abiding Marylanders to have an effective means of defending themselves and their loved ones. Our laws should burden criminals and aid good, lawful people. It is evident that those in power in Maryland care more for criminals and less for the law-abiding," Randy Kozuch, executive director of NRA-ILA, said in a press release.

NRA DIGS IN FOR LEGAL FIGHT AGAINST WOKE PROSECUTOR OVER ALLEGED 'ROADMAP' OF ABUSE
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-16-2023, 3:35 PM
AlmostHeaven AlmostHeaven is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Virginia
Posts: 3,483
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

How wonderful of these wise politicians to make so many places gun-free zones.

I can walk the streets of Baltimore at ease now that I know deadly weapons will be vaporized by a forcefield as soon as I cross the state lines.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-16-2023, 4:41 PM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,847
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Other than the ban on carrying on private property without permission (and assuming that there are provisions not explicitly mentioned such as public transportation as constituting government infrastructure), the bill is no worse than the current fee structure here or the current law that allows up to 16 hours of training. If SB2 passes (or should I say WHEN it passes), California will be even worse than Maryland.

Nice though that the NRA filed the same day the bill was signed into law.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-17-2023, 7:53 PM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 5,493
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default NRA Sues Maryland After Dem Governor Signs Gun Control Bills

NRA immediately hits Maryland with lawsuit after Dem governor signs sweeping gun control bills into law

Quote:
The NRA's lobbying arm filed a lawsuit against the state of Maryland on Tuesday after Democrat Gov. Wes Moore signed a pair of gun control bills that the NRA says will prevent law-abiding citizens from carrying for self-defense purposes.

Moore signed SB 1 and HB 824 into law Tuesday after Democrat lawmakers in the state championed the bills as ones that would cut back on crime and violence. The laws further restrict where residents can legally carry while making the application processes to obtain a carry license more burdensome.

The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) filed its lawsuit on Tuesday, Fox News exclusively learned, citing the measures as "illegal under the U.S. Constitution."...

SB 1 prevents residents - even if they have a permit - from carrying or transporting a firearm on private property without permission, and it also bans people from carrying firearms in areas such as schools, polling places, sports complexes or where alcohol is served...

HB 824 makes obtaining a carry license more burdensome. The law increases the application fee from $75 to $125, boosts renewal costs from $50 to $75, expands requirements for firearms training courses, requires that applicants submit two sets of fingerprints, and increases the age to lawfully possess a firearm from 18 to 21...
More detailed explanations of SB 1 and HB 824, as well as an embedded copy of the case - Kipke v. Moore - can be found at... NRA sues Maryland over newly passed gun control laws

What the NRA-ILA had to say yesterday... NRA-ILA Backed Lawsuit Challenging Maryland?s Unconstitutional Carry Restrictions Filed in Federal Court.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-17-2023, 9:48 PM
C.G.'s Avatar
C.G. C.G. is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Central Coast
Posts: 8,010
iTrader: 20 / 100%
Default

Dupe.

https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1860612
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-01-2023, 6:21 AM
GetMeCoffee's Avatar
GetMeCoffee GetMeCoffee is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 417
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

A preliminary injunction was entered on 9/29, just before the law was to go into effect. This was Maryland's "Bruen Response" bill. Obama appointee. Hopefully a good omen.

Fox News Article

Quote:
A federal judge in Maryland on Friday temporarily blocked part of a new state law that would restrict where gun owners can carry.

U.S. District Judge George Russell III, an Obama appointee, ruled the state can?t ban guns in places where alcohol is sold, on private property without permission of the owner or at public demonstrations.
Link to Docket for Kipke v. Moore (Courtlistener)
__________________

NRA Patriot Life Member, Benefactor
CRPA: Life Member
FPC: Member

It's 2025. Mickey Mouse is in the public domain and Goofy has left the White House.

Last edited by GetMeCoffee; 10-01-2023 at 6:35 AM.. Reason: Add docket links
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-01-2023, 7:50 AM
ProfChaos's Avatar
ProfChaos ProfChaos is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2021
Location: Folsom
Posts: 299
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Mark at Four Boxes has a take on it.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-vbI4GAfwY
__________________
"The past was alterable. The past never had been altered. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia." -George Orwell 1984

1984 was supposed to be a warning, not a "How To" guide.

Time magazine bragging about how they stole the election: https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-01-2023, 12:08 PM
Rickybillegas Rickybillegas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 1,102
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

To me, great News.

So far the Talley on lawsuits against sensitive places, particularly the private property default is thus:

1. NY: enjoined twice n '22, by Judge Suttaby and Sinatra. 2nd circuit
issued a stay, and TRO is currently in the 2nd circuit docket for review.

2. NJ: enjoined on Jan. 7, '23 and still in effect and pending review by 3rd
circuit.

3. HI: enjoined on August 6th and still in effect and scheduled for further
hearings.

4. MD: enjoined on September 29th.

So as far as the public default restriction, here is the score card:

5 district court judges say it's probably unconstitutional, no district court
judge has said otherwise.

The 3rd circuit denied a stay on NJ injunction and so th TRO is still in effect.

The 2nd circuit (NY) is the only court playing footsie and issued a stay on the
2 injunctions pending review on the merit of the injunctions.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-01-2023, 5:00 PM
AlmostHeaven AlmostHeaven is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Virginia
Posts: 3,483
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Angry

The First, Second, and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals are locked in a close race for which group of judges can most atextually distort NYSRPA v. Bruen, openly defy the Supreme Court, and effectively nullify the Second Amendment.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-01-2023, 6:27 PM
WithinReason WithinReason is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 711
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlmostHeaven View Post
The First, Second, and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals are locked in a close race for which group of judges can most atextually distort NYSRPA v. Bruen, openly defy the Supreme Court, and effectively nullify the Second Amendment.
I would laugh if it wasn't so painful...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-02-2023, 11:38 AM
Rickybillegas Rickybillegas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 1,102
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlmostHeaven View Post
The First, Second, and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals are locked in a close race for which group of judges can most atextually distort NYSRPA v. Bruen, openly defy the Supreme Court, and effectively nullify the Second Amendment.
Yeah, I think the 2nd circuit is trying to bury the Antonyuk challenge into legal limbo and delay for as long as possible. They certainly don't want a ruling on the merits. That will expose them. At least for as long as SCOTUS gets fed up and does something (or not). Then if SCOTUS takes it up, they can wash their hands.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-03-2023, 12:56 PM
Rickybillegas Rickybillegas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 1,102
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I'm going through this TRO ruling from Judge Russel, and I think he got a lot of it wrong and bought a lot of the States arguments that he shouldn't have.

Nevertheless, there are some things that will have influence on other similar cases (Ca SB2). Particularly regarding the private property default.

Firstly the state is defending, using the same tired arguments we've seen and have been tried already a number of times;

a) The early restrictions on private property which regulated against
hunting in certain locations and anti-brandishing laws.

b) Early laws banning firearms from slaves, Catholics and people of color.
In pretty clear terms, the Judge said in essence "we're not even going
to go there".

In summary, he said the Plaintiffs are likely to succeed.

Now, two things to remember here.

1. This is an Obama appointed Judge and likely a strong Idealogue
and opponent of the 2nd amendment.

and

2. This is a recent lawsuit and only a few weeks old (May 17). This
proves that anti gun states have not been able to come up with
anything new since Antonyuk.

Throw the same old stinky rotten mud at the wall out of desperation and hope some Judge(s) along the way commit dereliction of duty and rule against the constitution.

So far, it hasn't worked one iota.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-04-2023, 12:15 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,017
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Kipke v Moore

https://news.yahoo.com/federal-judge...ycsrp_catchall

The news article seems to be about a Black female judge appointed by Obama who agrees that some Maryland gun laws have gone to far and issued preliminary injuncions against there enforcement, while she disagress with some other judges pro2A decisions.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-04-2023, 2:44 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,017
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Another brain dead judge.

She ruled that Bruen prevents the consideration of public safety concernd when assesing if a frearm restricion was constitutional under the 2A, but because Bruen did not consider the granting of Prelim, its 2 part nht test , "and thus Winter prelim injunction test, and Winter requires the public inerest to be considered in determing whether a PI should be issued, the Judge held that Bruen did not forecose her from consideing the public interest in safety.

Right back to means-end analysis. She didn't get the bulletin in many cases telling her that there is no public interest in validating an uncostitutional statue.

The court listener link is https://www.courtlistener.com/docket...kipke-v-moore/ The Opinion is docket 31
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-04-2023, 3:18 PM
michaelh1951 michaelh1951 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 193
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlmostHeaven View Post
The First, Second, and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals are locked in a close race for which group of judges can most atextually distort NYSRPA v. Bruen, openly defy the Supreme Court, and effectively nullify the Second Amendment.

It's the ninth in a runaway! Second to place, and first to show!

The kangaroo ninth has set a new track record.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-04-2023, 3:20 PM
GetMeCoffee's Avatar
GetMeCoffee GetMeCoffee is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 417
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

There's already a thread discussing Kipke v. Moore. https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1860612. The thread title doesn't mention the case name but see (my) post #6.

ETA: Dupe thread was moved here.
__________________

NRA Patriot Life Member, Benefactor
CRPA: Life Member
FPC: Member

It's 2025. Mickey Mouse is in the public domain and Goofy has left the White House.

Last edited by GetMeCoffee; 10-05-2023 at 4:36 AM.. Reason: Post moved
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-04-2023, 5:00 PM
AlmostHeaven AlmostHeaven is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Virginia
Posts: 3,483
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelh1951 View Post
It's the ninth in a runaway! Second to place, and first to show!

The kangaroo ninth has set a new track record.
My personal ranking for Second Amendment obstinacy is Ninth Circuit, Second Circuit, First Circuit, Fourth Circuit.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-04-2023, 5:00 PM
AlmostHeaven AlmostHeaven is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Virginia
Posts: 3,483
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Unhappy

Interest-balancing has nine lives. The Supreme Court needs to kill it several more times before the philosophy actually dies.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-04-2023, 7:41 PM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Kootenai County Idaho (Hayden)
Posts: 4,672
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlmostHeaven View Post
Interest-balancing has nine lives. The Supreme Court needs to kill it several more times before the philosophy actually dies.
Interest-balancing is not an invalid concept. It just has no application to the Bill of Rights as that balancing was done at the founding!
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-04-2023, 10:45 PM
darkwater34 darkwater34 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 738
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

There are no safety concerns put into the Second Amendment, just like (" THERE IS NO CRYING IN BASEBALL ") The safety in the Second Amendment is that it keeps tryany from being oppressed on the American People.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 10-04-2023, 11:04 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,017
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rickybillegas View Post
I'm going through this TRO ruling from Judge Russel, and I think he got a lot of it wrong and bought a lot of the States arguments that he shouldn't have.

Nevertheless, there are some things that will have influence on other similar cases (Ca SB2). Particularly regarding the private property default.

Firstly the state is defending, using the same tired arguments we've seen and have been tried already a number of times;

a) The early restrictions on private property which regulated against
hunting in certain locations and anti-brandishing laws.

b) Early laws banning firearms from slaves, Catholics and people of color.
In pretty clear terms, the Judge said in essence "we're not even going
to go there".

In summary, he said the Plaintiffs are likely to succeed.

Now, two things to remember here.

1. This is an Obama appointed Judge and likely a strong Idealogue
and opponent of the 2nd amendment.

and

2. This is a recent lawsuit and only a few weeks old (May 17). This
proves that anti gun states have not been able to come up with
anything new since Antonyuk.

Throw the same old stinky rotten mud at the wall out of desperation and hope some Judge(s) along the way commit dereliction of duty and rule against the constitution.

So far, it hasn't worked one iota.
Judge Russel is a Black woman appointed by Obama,
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-04-2023, 11:13 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,017
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I am still mind boggled by the circuity of Judge Russels Alice in Wonderland Logic. Under Bruen a judgment is to be based on the Nation's historic traditon test and not means-balancing, which Bruen rejected for determing the constitutionaity of laws. However, the public interest and means-balancing are properly used to determine whether to issue a TRO/Prelinary Injunction since they are judgments.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-05-2023, 3:00 AM
AlmostHeaven AlmostHeaven is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Virginia
Posts: 3,483
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
I am still mind boggled by the circuity of Judge Russels Alice in Wonderland Logic. Under Bruen a judgment is to be based on the Nation's historic traditon test and not means-balancing, which Bruen rejected for determing the constitutionaity of laws. However, the public interest and means-balancing are properly used to determine whether to issue a TRO/Prelinary Injunction since they are judgments.
When your entire worldview and core philosophy revolves around government intervention as a force of social improvement and moral good, avoiding interest-balancing feels as torturous as trying to walk using your hands instead of feet.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-05-2023, 8:49 AM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,017
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

She is simply mind boggling in her illogic. You cannot do means-end scrutiny and consider the states interes in order to determine if a firearm regulation is constitutional, but you can means balance to deremine if a preliminary injunciton is warranted, and all a PI is a temporary enforcement of the likely judgment. Also several cases have held that there is no pubic interest in enforcing an unonstitutional law!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-05-2023, 9:00 AM
AlmostHeaven AlmostHeaven is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Virginia
Posts: 3,483
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Angry

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
She is simply mind boggling in her illogic. You cannot do means-end scrutiny and consider the states interes in order to determine if a firearm regulation is constitutional, but you can means balance to deremine if a preliminary injunciton is warranted, and all a PI is a temporary enforcement of the likely judgment. Also several cases have held that there is no pubic interest in enforcing an unonstitutional law!
Graduates of supposedly esteemed law schools and prestigious education instutions are not what they used to be in the current era of indoctrination over education.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-05-2023, 11:04 AM
Rickybillegas Rickybillegas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 1,102
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
Judge Russel is a Black woman appointed by Obama,

??????


george L. Russell.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-07-2023, 8:32 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,017
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Apologies to Judge George L. Russel III. Somehow the article I was reading got me to confuse another judge, a she, with he. What is more imporant is his nonsenical ruling. It comes down to Bruen will not allow means testing to determine the constitutionality of law for the purposes of issuing a permanent injunction, but it can be used to for balaning interests of the government in providing for public safety against its interests in enforcing constitutional laws. Forget that it has already been held that there is no public interest in enforcing unscostituional laws.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-08-2023, 11:49 AM
Rickybillegas Rickybillegas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 1,102
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
Apologies to Judge George L. Russel III. Somehow the article I was reading got me to confuse another judge, a she, with he. What is more imporant is his nonsenical ruling. It comes down to Bruen will not allow means testing to determine the constitutionality of law for the purposes of issuing a permanent injunction, but it can be used to for balaning interests of the government in providing for public safety against its interests in enforcing constitutional laws. Forget that it has already been held that there is no public interest in enforcing unscostituional laws.
I haven't read the whole ruling yet, but I have to agree, he bailed on some of the THT analysis, otherwise, he wouldn't have come up with some of the decisions he did.

I'm still positive on this ruling though because even a leftist Judge sees through the state's ridiculous posture on the PP default rule.

If we can get universal rulings across states and at the federal level, on this alone, we've accomplished quite a lot.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-08-2023, 2:55 PM
Jeepergeo's Avatar
Jeepergeo Jeepergeo is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Arcata
Posts: 3,490
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Sounds like California.
Gov Nuisance likely talked the Maryland Gov to do these bills in exchange for some creepy future favor.
__________________
Benefactor Life Member, National Rifle Association
Life Member, California Rifle and Pistol Association
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 10-09-2023, 11:31 AM
Rickybillegas Rickybillegas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2022
Posts: 1,102
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeepergeo View Post
Sounds like California.
Gov Nuisance likely talked the Maryland Gov to do these bills in exchange for some creepy future favor.
They're all trying the same things (NY, MD, NJ, HI, CA) and it appears all these laws are from the same exact template (EVERYTOWN?). I believe some lawyer legal beagles from one of the anti gun groups drew up this template right around or even before the BRUEN decision in aghast that they would actually have to issue to the common man, not just their buddies. And collaborated/coordinated with all the above said states. The template is slightly tweaked and edited per state, but pretty obviously from the same ultimate source.

Who talked to who first, second or third, who knows.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 10-09-2023, 4:00 PM
AlmostHeaven AlmostHeaven is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Virginia
Posts: 3,483
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Just like how the California Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989 became the template for every assault weapons ban across the country, the New York Concealed Carry Improvement Act has led to copy-paste legislation in 6 other states.
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 4:23 AM.




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