Kachalsky - CA2 Decision is out - Loss

[hoffmang]

Are you really opposing the idea that Justice Scalia tailored the Heller decision in the manner he did, to retain Justice Kennedy's vote?

Yes. I'm far more concerned that the opinion's dicta was to keep the Chief. However, even in that dicta is clear evidence that public carry is an expected part of the right. There are certainly no schools or government buildings in my house. Yours?

-Gene

[kcbrown]

Yes. I'm far more concerned that the opinion's dicta was to keep the Chief. However, even in that dicta is clear evidence that public carry is an expected part of the right. There are certainly no schools or government buildings in my house. Yours?

The antis will argue that the dicta was put there because the Court was concerned about governments taking transport off the table. They'd be incorrect, but that's how they'll argue.

[SilverBulletZ06]

The antis will argue that the dicta was put there because the Court was concerned about governments taking transport off the table. They'd be incorrect, but that's how they'll argue.

You all are on crack if you don't think that, if permitted, the court wouldn't skip over the carry issue altogether.

I hold no illusion that we are going to win on SCOTUS review.

[MOA1]

Nothing to add, I just wanted to say I appreciate reading all this, taking it in and thinking where we are headed.

My concern is CA laws and how this may help us in CA.

We can not open carry since Jan1 of this year, and we also can not obtain a CWP unless you are famous or rich or politician.

Is the "may issue" being challenged? Sorry if I'm not up on current topics here and missed it somewhere.

CA is NOT a may issue state, not in any real sense of the word. I've pursued every avenue and since I'm in LA county there is no way I'll get one. IF a court case regarding CCW permits goes in our favor, will it be of benefit to have already applied and been denied? Will the county be ordered to issue those denied permits?

[hoffmang]

Is the "may issue" being challenged? Sorry if I'm not up on current topics here and missed it somewhere.

The California cases to watch are Richards v. Prieto and Peruta v San Diego.

-Gene

[MOA1]

Thanks mang.

[kcbrown]

You all are on crack if you don't think that, if permitted, the court wouldn't skip over the carry issue altogether.

I hold no illusion that we are going to win on SCOTUS review.

Fortunately, since this case is entirely about carry, it would be difficult for the court to skip the issue. Not saying that it would be impossible, mind you (the Supreme Court can ultimately do whatever it pleases, after all)...

As for winning upon SCOTUS review, while I don't think such a win is a lock, I think the odds of us winning are currently greater than 50%. I think it's more likely that SCOTUS will simply deny cert than go to the trouble of explicitly ruling against us.

[Al Norris]

Yes. I'm far more concerned that the opinion's dicta was to keep the Chief.

Interesting opinion.

However, even in that dicta is clear evidence that public carry is an expected part of the right.

In that, we agree.

[Librarian]

At TFL, Al Norris has posted an update to Woolard that seems to bear on Kachalsky.

Alan Gura has posted his 28j letter noting the Kachalsky result - and like Al, I agree that last paragraph is indicative

[stix213]

At TFL, Al Norris has posted an update to Woolard that seems to bear on Kachalsky.

Alan Gura has posted his 28j letter noting the Kachalsky result - and like Al, I agree that last paragraph is indicative

Gura is a master wordsmith. We're fortunate he didn't end up a writer or journalist.