Teter et al v. Connors et al Hawaii Butterfly knife federal lawsuit filed

[Bhobbs]

The 9th will never let any true 2A cases win.

[ritter]

The 9th will never let any true 2A cases win.

6 months later, no less. Rules for thee and not for me, it would seem. CA9 is making an absolute mockery of justice.

[AlmostHeaven]

The 9th circuit just vacated the 3 judge panel ruling and is taking the case en banc.

Ironically, the Ninth Circuit seems to be the most fervent believers in Mark Smith's "brick-by-brick" theory. The liberal majority cannot allow a single pro-2A precedent to stand.

[abinsinia]

It's a completely predictable pattern at this point.

[Bhobbs]

Ironically, the Ninth Circuit seems to be the most fervent believers in Mark Smith's "brick-by-brick" theory. The liberal majority cannot allow a single pro-2A precedent to stand.

Brick by brick, they build their own anti-2A foundation. They know Scotus has no teeth. The worst case scenario is another Bruen, but they will easily avoid that one as well.

[Mute]

The only surprise here is that it took this long.

[splithoof]

Brick by brick, they build their own anti-2A foundation. They know Scotus has no teeth. The worst case scenario is another Bruen, but they will easily avoid that one as well.

Of all these laws that Bruen was supposed to address, which changes have really resulted in any practical change for blue-state gun owners? ABSOLUTELY FUKCING ZERO. The state and the lower courts have learned that the Eunuchs of SCOTUS are a paper tiger, a laughing stock, a smear on the floor of a beachside public toilet, and will do nothing but cry in the corner like a lost child.

[AlmostHeaven]

Leftists flagrantly ignore the Supreme Court to the detriment of the stability of the nation itself. A younger version of me, who harbored stronger trust in institutions, would have condemned Texas ignoring the SCOTUS order regarding the border situation. Now, I say carry onwards! Conservative states ought to defy the unsound reapportionment precedents next.

[abinsinia]

Filed order (MARY H. MURGUIA) En banc oral argument will take place during the week of June 24, 2024, in Seattle, Washington. The date and time will be determined by separate order. For further information or special requests regarding scheduling, please contact Deputy Clerk Paul Keller at paul_keller@ca9.uscourts.gov or (206) 224-2236. Within seven days from the date of this order, the parties shall forward to the Clerk of Court eighteen additional paper copies of the original briefs and ten additional paper copies of the excerpts of record. The paper copies must be accompanied by certification (attached to the end of each copy of the brief) that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. The Form 18 certificate is available on the Court's website at http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/forms/ [12862083] (WL) [Entered: 02/22/2024 09:58 AM]

They set a rough date for oral arguments.

[ritter]

When it takes 6 months to go en banc, what's another 4 months to orals? I mean, nobody needs rights, right?

[AlmostHeaven]

The en banc panel meets in Seattle, WA? I thought the Ninth Circuit headquarters is located in San Francisco, CA.

[Librarian]

The en banc panel meets in Seattle, WA? I thought the Ninth Circuit headquarters is located in San Francisco, CA.

https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/information/locations/

San Francisco, Portland, Pasadena, Seattle

[Offwidth]

Of all these laws that Bruen was supposed to address, which changes have really resulted in any practical change for blue-state gun owners? ABSOLUTELY FUKCING ZERO.

Me and my friends around got CCWs.

[AlmostHeaven]

Me and my friends around got CCWs.

I have family members living in Santa Clara County, who never had the opportunity to lawfully carry until NYSRPA v. Bruen. Remember Sheriff Laurie Smith and her bribery scheme.

[abinsinia]

I've not been following this case closely but I was reviewing the docket and it appears Hawaii passed ACT 21 which modifies the laws related to butterfly knifes.

Filed (ECF) Appellees Anne E. Lopez and Darryl Ng Motion to remand case, Motion for miscellaneous relief [Suggestion of Mootness]. Date of service: 05/14/2024. [12884469] [20-15948] (Katyal, Neal) [Entered: 05/14/2024 12:27 PM]

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca9.322259/gov.uscourts.ca9.322259.178.1.pdf

And Teter filed a motion in opposition a few days ago.

Filed (ECF) Appellants James Grell and Andrew Teter response opposing motion ([178] Motion (ECF Filing), [178] Motion (ECF Filing) motion to remand case, [178] Motion (ECF Filing) motion for miscellaneous relief (to be used only if no other relief applies)). Date of service: 05/21/2024. [12886127] [20-15948] (Beck, Alan) [Entered: 05/21/2024 08:41 AM]

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca9.322259/gov.uscourts.ca9.322259.179.0.pdf