Jackson v. SF (Ammo Ban; Locked Storage Reqts.): Cert DENIED 6/8/15

[thorium]

Even though statistically, and objectively speaking, it's the least likely outcome...

I'm really "feeling" a somewhat narrowly crafted per curiam reversal could be in the works... Perhaps something like "heller said pistol ready to use in home is protected. Only (strict)?! scrutiny can apply to the bearing of a pistol in the home, and for most/many classes of people, like those without children or with older children, the storage requirement cant pass intermediate let alone strict scrutiny."

Maybe Just fishful thinking!

All orders are out, no news on Jackson = relisted again

The more relists stack up, the more likely a summary reversal is in the works (not saying it's likely, just saying it's becoming relatively more likely, to make up numbers for an example... 5% before rising to 10%)

[rlc2]

Two other 'gun' rights related cases decided...

Sheehan- where cops had been at risk for shooting a disabled woman, ...

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/13-1412_0pl1.pdf

its complicated, and the take-away is that per an article I've read elsewhere that cops are pulling away from dealing with mentally ill because of fears they will not be covered by limited immunity, or legal protections- with the unintended consequence being that the mentally ill get even less proactive attention
(remember the debate on Isla Harbor- the Assywyn who claimed the GVRO legislation originally started out as more funding for early identification, LEO training POST to evaluate and handle, and more funding for facilities?

This was the issue for Lanza of Sandy Hook, and for Elliot Rodgers of Isla Harbor - his mom could get no proactive police help for her son, because the system just couldnt intervene. But the GVRO was only the first, and easy beginning to solutions - a way for the family to report the dangerous person, to be evaluated before a crime is committed.

Whats STILL missing in all the 2A litigation, and Brady briefs, is the badly needed PRACTICAL and costly focus on helping the mentally ill, as opposed to simply taking the popular easy and completely WRONG action, adding more laws to deny 2A rights to the law abiding...

And so progressives, instead of serving the at risk mentally ill, who have only a 72 hour hold after being dumped in the emergency room, end up on the street, living under a bridge in CA because mental health practioners, cops, judges, and facilities dont have the tools or funding to help them.

Instead, we have more regulation of the tool used- the gun (and of course, a completely illogical off-focus, forgetting Rodgers used a knife first, and a BMW third, on his victims) vs helping the Santa Barbara Sheriffs be more proactive on a welfare visit and inspect his apartment.

DOING MENTAL HEALTH HELP RIGHT is the POINT WE POTG NEED TO BE PROACTIVE AND AGGRESSIVELY PROMOTING - instead of reactive, we SHOULD be partnering with the medical profession, the mental health pros, and the police unions, to be identifying the source of the problem- inner city dysfunction in families, and on mentally ill. That is of course, a very tough problem, and it points straight at the failings of the progressive top-down socialist model, which is why they are so desperate to point instead to limiting 2A rights, instead....

Henderson is about a 922 transfer-

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/13-1487_l6gn.pdf

[rlc2]

couple more observations about the live updates at Scotusblog

All orders are out, no news on Jackson = relisted again

The more relists stack up, the more likely a summary reversal is in the works (not saying it's likely, just saying it's becoming relatively more likely, to make up numbers for an example... 5% before rising to 10%)

I read somewhere that interest in Scotusblog is expanding exponentially- something like 3000 lawyers vs couple hundred a year back- and now that you can see their questions on inner workings, there are a lot of useful insights about how things work, to plug into debates and game theory about what Scotus is thinking-

for example, (and it appears that after the live portion is done, some of the conversation is curated, to leave only the most useful, so I cant link to the exact quote) something like one denial, and 6 opinions were distributed. That leaves 28, which I believe Amy, the live blogger, noted would be an opinion a day (5 per week) starting on Tuesday after Memorial Day.

That speaks to the workload theory I suggested, and to the explanations given by Richard Re, and others writting on Scotusblog and elsewhere, for "why more relists in 2014 and 2015" is because the SCT is being very careful to get it right. There was one case "DIG" dismissed as improvidently granted, in the 9th, because on review the clerks and Justices felt the 9th hadnt done its job properly - ie missed the point in legal theory of the case. (would that classify as a vertical b1tchslap to the 9th...

Anyway, point being, the Scotusblog, and especially live blog of weekly results is a HUGE resource to court-watchers and game theorists, KC, Raisuli, and those others who are noobs, like me, to better understand the practical reasons why things happen- that are more fundamental, Occam's Razor like, than politics. (and spend less time on tin-foil-hat stuff...and not waste energy on misdirected anger/angst/snark ...low imp you out there, mi amigo?)

And to thoriums reply, above- here is an answer to a question that shows that lawyers or other court followers are also asking about the basics of how things work:

David Souter's Flux Capacitor 7:02 AM

If a case neither denied nor granted cert, is relist the only option? Is summary judgment without oral argument a possibility- or would that also appear on the order list? (Looking at Jackson v SF)
by gcc 7:02 AM

Amy Howe

The Court will sometimes relist a case while it is drafting a summary reversal. But a decision can also be relisted while someone writes a dissent from the denial or a statement respecting the denial.

7:03 AM (bolding is mine)

[wireless]

So... relist?

[Shootabilly]

Summary reversal, with language that stated " San Francisco clearly doesn't understand Heller which implies loaded carry as a right in or out of the home.

Game. Set. Match

[ColdDeadHands1]

Summary reversal, with language that stated " San Francisco clearly doesn't understand Heller which implies loaded carry as a right in or out of the home.

Game. Set. Match

Is this speculation or did it just happen? Not a cool tease with everyone on pins and needles this morning!

[North86]

Is this speculation or did it just happen? Not a cool tease with everyone on pins and needles this morning!

I am guessing that he's speculating.

[Shootabilly]

Summary reversal, with language that stated " San Francisco clearly doesn't understand Heller which implies loaded carry as a right in or out of the home.

Game. Set. Match

Is this speculation or did it just happen? Not a cool tease with everyone on pins and needles this morning!

As noted earlier, Jackson was relisted. This was my June prediction. Since nothing more will be heard until June

[rlc2]

Relist, to be determined...hopes rising for reversal.

As noted earlier, Jackson was relisted. This was my June prediction. Since nothing more will be heard until June

Per my earlier irresponsible spekulatin'

I adjust my odds upward, as to reverse- 50%,
given Kagan's "crisp written opinion" (see post below) on Henderson, unanimous decision, citing the overly "expansive" application of the authority of the government:

"Finally, the Government’s expansive idea of constructive possession fits poorly with its concession that a felon in Henderson’s position may select a firearms dealer or other third party to sell his guns and give him the proceeds."

I assume Jackson was assigned to Justice Kennedy, but either way, since he has been reportedly skeptical of federal govts arguments in this terms gay marriage case, that implies to me he will be skeptical of the expansive public safety rational of City of San Fran, and of the 9ths reasoning in Jackson, making him #5 to reverse.

Along with the Heller 4, if Kagan is showing a "judicial responsibility" tendencies rather than 'judicial restraint in the Holmesian tradition of deferring to the will of the majority in legislation', no matter how bad that democratic rule is, as in City of San Fran's over-reach into the home in Jackson, then she will be number 6.

Jackson *should be* a straightforward unanimous decision, as a square contradiction to Heller, even easier than Henderson, so that means as a practical matter, someone is writing a dissent from the summary reversal, my guess Sotomayer.

IANAL, and as some have pointed out, SCOTUS doesnt rule on reasoning, only on decisions, and since Jackson as a decision is not creating a split, and its only a case involving a dinky uberliberal enclave of nitwits, its not that precedential. Its also NOT the SG asking, and not the State asking, only the former SG, MR Clements, asking for sanity in the form of a proactive reversal from SCOTUS. If thats not gonna happen in this case, politics-wise, then someone like Scalia is writing a blistering dissent from deny cert.

Since SCOTUS holds the big cases, gay rights, ACA, illegal immigration, until the end to announce, and since SCOTUS still has 28 of 36 to dispose of, then this dissent writing should be just about done, or will be, by early June. So endeth my hope for a Relist Streak winner, ending at 5 or 6, instead of >8, or into next term.

[Shootabilly]

SCOTUS, via Henderson and Jackson now have the ability to send a "message" to the Ninth on how the court views gun rights and ownership when they review Peruta in June.

With that being said, it doesn't mean the 9th will get it right.

[rlc2]

Scotusblog writer Richard Re on Henderson

http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/05/opinion-analysis-an-equitable-result-in-henderson-v-united-states/

PS: I realize this is slightly OT from the official thread of Jackson, but it might shed light on SCOTUS thinking in re: the 9th.

[x90]

Officially relisted:

May 18 2015 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 21, 2015.

[Paladin]

Officially relisted:

85 hours to go....

[lowimpactuser]

85 hours to go....

LET'S BE LIKE OUR CALIFORNIA FORBEARS AND... SPECULATE! Except it's not about gold, it's about Cert!

I'm firmly in the "Relist until June" camp now.

Paladin? Come on buddy. You're just as eager and unable to nap that long (you're efficient on no more than 6 hours too?) and unable to eat sandwiches (you're eating low-carb as well?) as I am.

So let's engage in fluffy light non-buttered, non-ruin your diet popcorn speculation!

[wildhawker]

LET'S BE LIKE OUR CALIFORNIA FORBEARS AND... SPECULATE! Except it's not about gold, it's about Cert!

I'm firmly in the "Relist until June" camp now.

Paladin? Come on buddy. You're just as eager and unable to nap that long (you're efficient on no more than 6 hours too?) and unable to eat sandwiches (you're eating low-carb as well?) as I am.

So let's engage in fluffy light non-buttered, non-ruin your diet popcorn speculation!

I predict at least 2 more hours-to-go updates and 5 posts that's don't say anything substantive (excluding this one) before we hear real news.