|
National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion Discuss national gun rights and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
NRA SUIT AGAINST MARYLAND
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/nr...32960a39&ei=46
Quote:
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
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:
What the NRA-ILA had to say yesterday... NRA-ILA Backed Lawsuit Challenging Maryland?s Unconstitutional Carry Restrictions Filed in Federal Court. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
__________________
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
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:
__________________
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 |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
__________________
"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/ |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
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.
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
I would laugh if it wasn't so painful...
__________________
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
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.
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
It's the ninth in a runaway! Second to place, and first to show! The kangaroo ninth has set a new track record. |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
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 |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
My personal ranking for Second Amendment obstinacy is Ninth Circuit, Second Circuit, First Circuit, Fourth Circuit.
|
#19
|
||||
|
||||
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!
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
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.
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
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!
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
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.
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
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. |
#29
|
||||
|
||||
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 |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Who talked to who first, second or third, who knows. |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
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.
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|