Williams v. Maryland ~ Petition for Writ of Cert

[krucam]

Can SCOTUS just take it w/o the US filing a response?

Its not a matter of "can". They flatly won't take it. The theory is that if not a single Judge wants to request a response (thats all it takes), you're not going to get 4 Justices on board to grant Cert, you sure as hell aren't going to get 5 to go your way.

The Petition needs to pique one Justice's curiosity who will request a response. We'll get that far, I'm sure.

Back to Williams....

[yellowfin]

It seems like almost all of the arguing for Williams is done already.

[Glock22Fan]

Its not a matter of "can". They flatly won't take it. The theory is that if not a single Judge wants to request a response (thats all it takes), you're not going to get 4 Justices on board to grant Cert, you sure as hell aren't going to get 5 to go your way.

The Petition needs to pique one Justice's curiosity who will request a response. We'll get that far, I'm sure.

Back to Williams....

I see that they won't take it unless at least one Justice asks to see the other side's response, but surely once that request is made, if they still don't get a response, they can - almost should - grant cert. Otherwise, which ever party is ahead at that point simply doesn't need to respond and then it won't get taken.

[dantodd]

I see that they won't take it unless at least one Justice asks to see the other side's response, but surely once that request is made, if they still don't get a response, they can - almost should - grant cert. Otherwise, which ever party is ahead at that point simply doesn't need to respond and then it won't get taken.

I think that what Krucam was saying is that with the vast number of petitions the court sees each year and chooses not to act on it is prudent, and common practice, for respondents to waive their right to respond unless the court requests a response. It seems to be the best way to conserve expensive legal resources; often the one saving money is the tax payers.

[hoffmang]

it is a coincidence, that is the "long conference" where they address every cert request from the summer.

I think you typoed. It's not a coincidence as that is the long conference.

-Gene

[Paladin]

Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong (not that I have to ask for that), but if the briefs are in (Petition, Respondant, optional Petitioner Reply), the results of Conference will typically be announced the following Monday, meaning Oct 3rd for Williams.

In Masciandaro, we only have the Petitioner's Brief. US Waived their Response, meaning we now need a Justice to request a Response. Any such request isn't going to happen till they return late Sept, perhaps after the scheduled Conference. US will be given their 30+30, read 60 days to respond. Petitioner Reply Brief 10 days after that. I'd guess a 2nd conference for Masciandaro in late-Nov/early-Dec.

Thanks. Calendar marked.

[2Bear]

Petitioners (Halbrook/Peterson) filed their response to MD's Opposition to Cert.

Fun seeing Ezell woven into their position.

[press1280]

Its not a matter of "can". They flatly won't take it. The theory is that if not a single Judge wants to request a response (thats all it takes), you're not going to get 4 Justices on board to grant Cert, you sure as hell aren't going to get 5 to go your way.

The Petition needs to pique one Justice's curiosity who will request a response. We'll get that far, I'm sure.

Back to Williams....

But can't the clerks(by direction of a justice) request a party to respond? Would we necessarily have to wait until the Sept. conference for this?

[krucam]

But can't the clerks(by direction of a justice) request a party to respond? Would we necessarily have to wait until the Sept. conference for this?

I really don't know the answer to that. It depends how "Off" when they're off for the Summer. I'm sure there's communications back to the Clerks over the break.

I guess we'll find out in the next 7-8 weeks...

[Patrick-2]

But can't the clerks(by direction of a justice) request a party to respond? Would we necessarily have to wait until the Sept. conference for this?

That is exactly how it works. The clerks do the work. The justices remain in the background and unless they say something, you won't know who asked for the response.

I wouldn't worry much about "when". If it happens, it will happen. Summer, Fall, whenever...it all leads to the same same day in June.

I'm with you guys and want to see the response sooner than later. But the longer they take, the more time I have to go outside and try to wear holes in those AR-500 steel targets.

[press1280]

That is exactly how it works. The clerks do the work. The justices remain in the background and unless they say something, you won't know who asked for the response.

I wouldn't worry much about "when". If it happens, it will happen. Summer, Fall, whenever...it all leads to the same same day in June.

I'm with you guys and want to see the response sooner than later. But the longer they take, the more time I have to go outside and try to wear holes in those AR-500 steel targets.

There's also the high possibility that as soon as certiorari is granted, all cases come to a screeching halt. That may be a bad thing because some of our cases may be able to win in the lower courts(not a high percentage though), so those victories may be delayed.
Is there a date at which, if neither Williams nor Masciandaro have gotten an answer, that they won't be heard this term? Does SCOTUS holdover cert. requests to the next term?

[Kharn]

All but the most extraordinary cases will be decided by next July, our cases will not be held over. A case petitioning for cert in December would be the earliest I would expext a case to fall to the next term due to all the various deadlines and extensions.

[Patrick-2]

One of our members on MDShooters noticed that Halbrook's reply brief to the state is out.

http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/lawsuits/williams_v_maryland_replybrief.pdf

All those concerned about Williams need to read this. Clear, concise and convincing.

The State contends that because there was an “available mechanism for obtaining a handgun permit” no conflict exists with Heller and McDonald. The availability of permits to a narrow class does not alter the critical error in the Court’s holding that the people of Maryland have no Second Amendment right to bear arms outside their homes. The Maryland court did not hold that the carry statute and permitting process withstood constitutional scrutiny. It held that there will be no scrutiny at all.

Carry permits are not available to ordinary citizens in Maryland. The State’s entire Opposition turns on the supposition that Mr. Williams could have obtained a permit. The unacknowledged elephant in the kitchen is that, by law, he could not. Maryland case law specifically confirms that a permit will not be issued for a person whose need for protection is “that of an ordinary citizen.”

This case is clear because Maryland's courts ruled that the Second Amendment does not exist outside the home, at all. They even went so far as to say that if it does, the Supreme Court will need to say so.

Williams' conviction turns on this holding - that the Second Amendment does not apply outside the home. The Appeals Court did not even consider a 2A defense, because they said none was available. They would not consider a challenge to the permitting scheme, because there was no right to bear arms outside the home.

This is the critical failing that this cert petition seeks to redress. Maryland made it the only issue.

This is why I say Williams is a "pure" RKBA case. If you look at the conviction and the ruling made to uphold it, the state itself got rid of any and all secondary baggage over tossing guns in bushes, permit applications, and the like. They said "Williams is convicted and has no Second Amendment defense because the right does not extend outside the home."

You cannot get any more direct than that.


N.B.: I am not saying this case is "better" than Masciandaro. I won't play team comparisons, because I think both cases are important and both deserve answers. Williams and Masciandaro are different cases presenting differing issues. Both require the same core holding, but after that they diverge. I want Masciandaro to get cert. There need not be a dramatic horse race.

[yellowfin]

How can SCOTUS possibly resist a direct challenge like Williams? Does it get any plainer than that?

[Kharn]

Chutzpah only works when you can back it up, I can't wait for 3 October...