Tea Leaf Reading on St. Benitez Timing????

[SpudmanWP]

SCOTUS can easily issue PI, if the judge declines the motion. SCOTUS failed to uphold their own opinion.

SCOTUS cannot issue a PI unless a motion for a PI comes before it. No case post-Bruen has got to that stage yet. The only two items to come before it were appeals to Stays based on inappropriate processes. Both times the lower court corrected so that SCOTUS would not have to intervene.

Once Miller, Duncan, etc get to the Circuit stage, we can view their actions when motions come up that have relevance.

[riderr]

SCOTUS cannot issue a PI unless a motion for a PI comes before it. No case post-Bruen has got to that stage yet. The only two items to come before it were appeals to Stays based on inappropriate processes. Both times the lower court corrected so that SCOTUS would not have to intervene.

Once Miller, Duncan, etc get to the Circuit stage, we can view their actions when motions come up that have relevance.

you and I live in different worlds. Exactly what the lower court corrected here?

https://www.scotusblog.com/2023/01/court-allows-new-york-to-enforce-new-gun-control-law-while-legal-challenge-proceeds/

https://www.scotusblog.com/2023/05/c...lower%20courts.

[BAJ475]

"America is at that awkward stage; it's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."


― Claire Wolfe

I see that we agree. They are bastards! So how long to we have to wait?

[SpudmanWP]

Both of those were "interlocutory" appeals.

In the NY one, the 2nd Circuit was treating this case differently by issuing a Stay without expediting the schedule. After SCOTUS' warning, they expedited.

IL took the hint and immediately expedited.

In both cases, it demonstrated that SCOTUS has a long-standing aversion to interfering in the middle of cases in lower courts unless they are doing something wrong. There are too many cases of every type for SCOTUS to deal with every one of them. They have to let the process play out.

[AlmostHeaven]

As much as the institution is theoretically supposed to exist above the fray of politics, the Supreme Court is under tremendous political pressure at the moment due to the highly-unpopular Dobbs decision as well as Justice Thomas' alleged financial dealings.

To aggressively utilize the emergency (shadow) docket to expand gun rights is likely beyond what the more "moderate" Justices are willing to entertain. This is especially true due to prominent liberal legal scholars publishing books and countless articles over the past year harshly criticizing the so-called overuse of the shadow docket.

The reason why, in my opinion, this is no cause to become cynical, is once lower courts enter final judgements in the various gun rights cases, the Supreme Court will have the opportunity to hear the lawsuits properly on the merits docket and publish full-length opinions, which will be much more powerful than emergency unsigned opinions.

[bruss01]

This is pointless. You can settle for wins that don?t actually move our rights forward. I?ll wait until I can properly exercise my rights before I call it a win.

I think the key here is qualifying a "win" as if it were a finish line. Different folks draw that "line" at different places.

So because of this I don't think it's helpful to back and forth about whether we are "winning" or have "won".

It is more helpful to ask "are we making progress?" I think any reasonable person will agree that progress is being made for gun rights even if it hasn't changed much tangibly for them personally.

Ten years ago I couldn't have gotten a CCW permit... now I can. More than half of all states are now constitutional carry. Fifteen years ago I had no personal individual right to keep and bear arms legally defined, now I do.

During the Civil War, the emancipation proclamation technically freed all slaves. But did that mean they all became instantly free in actual practice? No. In fact, when the civil war ended, were all slaves immediately free? No... it was not until June nineteenth of that year that the benefits of all that had gone before, finally reached everyone impacted. It then took additional decades to flesh out civil rights reforms. A "win" is rarely ever the true finish line.

So I think that on this Juneteenth we can both give thanks for the progress that has been made, while still realizing that the full tangible benefits of our past victories have not yet filtered down to all of us. Heller/McDonald was a great victory, and Bruen is a great victory, but the war is not over and triumph is far from universal or complete.

But the tide of battle has most definitely turned and momentum is on our side. Maybe instead of sitting and lamenting the incompleteness we can start getting enthusiastic about where the current trajectory is taking us and get prepared to do whatever we can to keep the wheel turning in that favorable direction. To me that sounds like the more constructive and potentially productive attitude to take.

To those of us who still suffer under serious curtailments of our 2A rights, yes, we know how much it grates your mind and soul to be denied freedoms your forefathers took for granted, STILL, even after all these many so-called "victories"... because for you, nothing tangible has changed... YET. Rest assured that the fight is not over, and those who are waging it on the front lines have not packed up and gone home, considering the job "done". It is still work in progress, work that will eventually yield tangible fruit... unless of course we lose patience, shrug, and give up in disgust at how much time and labor the undertaking requires... far more than any of us would have suspected given that the plain truth of those 27 words is there for all to read and understand.

This Junteenth or Independence Day, take a moment to feel gratitude and thanks for the victories already won, and to fortify yourself for whatever role there is for each of us in the efforts still in the pipeline.

[Mayor McRifle]

It’s going to happen this week.

[ritter]

It?s going to happen this week.

You sound very certain. Why?

[Dvrjon]

COB Today. Juneteenth!

[SpudmanWP]

To aggressively utilize the emergency (shadow) docket to restore gun rights is likely ...

FIFY

Sorry, it's a pet peeve.

[Rickybillegas]

As much as the institution is theoretically supposed to exist above the fray of politics, the Supreme Court is under tremendous political pressure at the moment due to the highly-unpopular Dobbs decision as well as Justice Thomas' alleged financial dealings.

To aggressively utilize the emergency (shadow) docket to expand gun rights is likely beyond what the more "moderate" Justices are willing to entertain. This is especially true due to prominent liberal legal scholars publishing books and countless articles over the past year harshly criticizing the so-called overuse of the shadow docket.

The reason why, in my opinion, this is no cause to become cynical, is once lower courts enter final judgements in the various gun rights cases, the Supreme Court will have the opportunity to hear the lawsuits properly on the merits docket and publish full-length opinions, which will be much more powerful than emergency unsigned opinions.

This.

We need to realize how important the present makeup of SCOTUS is, even far from perfect. The present circumstances are fragile.
Packing the court would only take a simple senate majority without the filibuster, plus Joe. The Dems have that simple majority,
Right now, only two D senators stand against eliminating the filibuster;
Manchin and Sinema, and the Dems have their target on both of them.
This is how fragile our God given rights hang in the balance,
If the Dems pack the court, the disaster will be beyond any of our imagining.

The previous term elections proved how brave our SCOTUS members were, but the enemy used their ruling on Dobbs to negate any inroads we otherwise have made. The enemy was able to convince millions that SCOTUS has gone rogue. SCOTUS must tread carefully and not appear partisan and sway public opinion to the degree that the enemy becomes bold enough to begin court packing.

[Drivedabizness]

The fight will not be in the court rooms.....
The people will have to demand their rights by force. Right now we are doing our best to keep our rights in a peaceful and quiet manner by trusting that the courts will prevail for us we shouldn't be having to wait for the court to decide on our rights that are being illegally deprived from the free people.

Remember people lost their rights in Nazi Germany and that was done by decisions made by judges.

History may be on its very way to repeating itself.

The judges cannot be so blind and naieve that they cannot see the writing on the wall.

To your point, Judge Benitez brought this up from the bench (paraphrasing) "the Courts are the only peaceful solution the Plaintiffs have available".

I hope he includes that notion in his coming opinion(s). We've been patient and endured irreparable harm - but we can't be expected to tolerate tyranny indefinitely.

[AlmostHeaven]

This.

We need to realize how important the present makeup of SCOTUS is, even far from perfect. The present circumstances are fragile.
Packing the court would only take a simple senate majority without the filibuster, plus Joe. The Dems have that simple majority,
Right now, only two D senators stand against eliminating the filibuster;
Manchin and Sinema, and the Dems have their target on both of them.
This is how fragile our God given rights hang in the balance,
If the Dems pack the court, the disaster will be beyond any of our imagining.

The previous term elections proved how brave our SCOTUS members were, but the enemy used their ruling on Dobbs to negate any inroads we otherwise have made. The enemy was able to convince millions that SCOTUS has gone rogue. SCOTUS must tread carefully and not appear partisan and sway public opinion to the degree that the enemy becomes bold enough to begin court packing.

You are absolutely correct. As much as I, like everyone else in this forum, may want the Supreme Court to summarily reverse all lower court decisions upholding infringements on the right to keep and bear arms, such a maneuver would likely push public opinion over the edge for packing SCOTUS.

Incrementally moving the front line by gradually striking down major gun control planks through merits docket rulings is the only sustainable way to make progress, at least while the most anti-gun administration in United States history sits in the White House.

[AlmostHeaven]

FIFY

Sorry, it's a pet peeve.

You're absolutely correct. Even I am susceptible to using mainstream media framing sometimes.

[sparky1979]

My prediction is we will get St. Benitez decisions on the anniversary of the Bruen decision, in order to make that day even more special.

Sent from my SM-S908U1 using Tapatalk