Bianchi v. Frosh, 2020 USDC MD 'assault weapon' GVR to 4th 6-30-22

[Offwidth]

Or they are waiting on Duncan.

[Sputnik]

Or they are waiting on Duncan.

At this point, that seems more likely. It just doesn’t take this long to write a dissent. If that’s what it was I think it would have dropped by now.
Once you get to, what is it, fourteen relists, it looks like they’re waiting for something else.

[abinsinia]

In the video Mark describes another case called Apache Stronghold,

https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/24-291.html

Apache Stronghold is a religious liberty case which was also relisted along with Snopes and Ocean State Tactical. He explains why he thinks all these cases are being relisted in the video.

[pythonfan]

Someone posted in the Duncan thread that it will be filed next week. So hopefully they get the ball rolling quickly after that.

[Sputnik]

Another week, another relist…

May 27 2025

DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/29/2025.

[abinsinia]

The video describes two cases which were relisted many times at SCOTUS, but yesterday were denied. So many relists definitely doesn't mean they are going to grant cert.

[riderr]

The video describes two cases which were relisted many times at SCOTUS, but yesterday were denied. So many relists definitely doesn't mean they are going to grant cert.

The hope is still alive.

[abinsinia]

Looks like it was denied cert.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/060225zor_4f15.pdf

Thomas dissented.

[Sgt Raven]

Snope denied.

https://www.youtube.com/live/yRCwPM9XwgU?si=F6r9hYzoXOS0KbY1

[dawgcasa]

Looks like it was denied cert.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/060225zor_4f15.pdf

Thomas dissented.

So the question I have, given Kavanaugh’s and Thomas’ dissents clearly state the egregiousness of the 4th Circuit’s distortions of Heller and Bruen, WHAT for heavens sake are the other so-called ‘conservatives’ that voted for Bruen waiting for? What ‘defect’ existed in this case? It was a final decision. The 4th Circuits ‘analysis’ was an egregious and purposeful undermining of the SCOTUS mandated tests in Heller and Bruen. There won’t ever be “circuit split” on this 2A issue since the ONLY appeals courts to hear AW ban cases are in liberal circuits covering the liberal states that pass these laws. EVERY AW ban case is thus assured to end up with the same conclusion from a liberal appeals court. Only SCOTUS can issue a slap-down to these rebellious circuit courts that are defying SCOTUS precedents. This is no different than how southern courts completely ignored civil rights for blacks … until the Supreme Court issued a smack-down AND the federal government directly intervened in those state’s. The liberal Circuit Courts will go on defying SCOTUS on 2A jurisprudence … until SCOTUS takes one of these cases and categorically eviscerates these distortions of Heller and Bruen.

[abinsinia]

So the question I have, given Kavanaugh’s and Thomas’ dissents clearly state the egregiousness of the 4th Circuit’s distortions of Heller and Bruen, WHAT for heavens sake are the other so-called ‘conservatives’ that voted for Bruen waiting for? What ‘defect’ existed in this case? It was a final decision. The 4th Circuits ‘analysis’ was an egregious and purposeful undermining of the SCOTUS mandated tests in Heller and Bruen. There won’t ever be “circuit split” on this 2A issue since the ONLY appeals courts to hear AW ban cases are in liberal circuits covering the liberal states that pass these laws. EVERY AW ban case is thus assured to end up with the same conclusion from a liberal appeals court. Only SCOTUS can issue a slap-down to these rebellious circuit courts that are defying SCOTUS precedents. This is no different than how southern courts completely ignored civil rights for blacks … until the Supreme Court issued a smack-down AND the federal government directly intervened in those state’s. The liberal Circuit Courts will go on defying SCOTUS on 2A jurisprudence … until SCOTUS takes one of these cases and categorically eviscerates these distortions of Heller and Bruen.

You have Thomas dissents, and Alito and Gorsuch wanted to grant cert. Also Kavanaugh has already acknowledged that assault weapons bans are illegal in another case. You need 4 to grant cert and they had four in Thomas, Gorsuch, Alito, and Kavanaugh, yet they did not grant cert.

Some quotes from Thomas's dissent,

I would not wait to decide whether the government can ban the most popular rifle in America.

... further percolation is of little value when lower courts in the jurisdictions that ban AR–15s appear bent on distorting this Court’s Second Amendment precedents.

So I would guess that the other judges want to wait for something else, or a circuit split they know will never happen, or they don't have time this term.

Additional petitions for certiorari will likely be before this Court shortly and, inmy view, this Court should and presumably will address the AR–15 issue soon, in the next Term or two.

Kavanaugh seems to be the one that wanted to wait, but it's clear he wants to decide one of AWB cases.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

My guess is that someone or several someone's are attempting to combine so-called 'assault weapons' with so-called 'high-capacity' magazines. The Maryland case was about so-called 'assault weapons,' but the Rhode Island case had to do with magazines. The idea has me a bit nervous in that SCOTUS has made it fairly clear that bans on semi-autos aren't legitimate; however, the magazine issue is, as the Rhode Island AG supposedly put it, 'still developing.'

See... Supreme Court won't review bans on assault-style weapons and high-capacity magazines

...Justice Brett Kavanaugh noted that challenges to other bans on assault-style weapons are being considered in lower courts and, "in my view, this Court should and presumably will address the AR-15 issue soon."

Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas said they would have taken up now both Maryland's ban on assault-style weapons and Rhode Island's ban on high-capacity magazines...

The Supreme Court’s most recent ruling on the Second Amendment – a 2024 decision upholding a gun control law intended to protect victims of domestic violence – offered little clarity, he said.

In that ruling, the Supreme Court said lower courts were misunderstanding their methodology. A gun regulation must have only a “historical analogue” and not a “historical twin” to be upheld, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote.

His opinion did not say how that test should be applied to regulations like Maryland’s or Rhode Island's...

Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha told the Supreme Court it did not need to get involved at this stage as the record is still being developed while the challenge continues.

The ban, Neronha wrote in a filing, “imposes a relatively mild restriction on a particularly dangerous weapon accessory.”

[ThortheDog]

This is more than disappointing. Is it possible they are waiting on the Cali cases, since Benitez' decisions are so exhaustive and well reasoned?

[dawgcasa]

So we have Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh state that want to take an AW ban case because they believe the lower courts decisions are egregiously incorrect. Yet Kavanaugh wouldn’t vote to take THIS one. Why? Did he feel that this case wasn’t the ‘right’ case for some reason? Even if they get a subsequent petition for a new AW ban case, it is VERY likely to have all the same attributes as SNOPE, probably even the same analysis as used by the 4th Circuit. Why? Because so far only liberal Circuit Courts of appeals have heard AW ban cases, due to there not being any AW bans in states covered by conservative majority Circuits. And any other liberal Circuit on a new AW ban case will simply retread the SNOPE opinion as its ‘precedent’. Thus, there is not going to be any ‘Circuit split’, or any ‘new analysis’ from any further cases ‘percolating’ through the other Circuit Courts. If SCOTUS wants to stop the abuse and undermining of the Heller and Bruen decisions being exercised by Circuits like the 4th, 2nd, or 9th, they need to step up, take the case, as deliver a smack-down. Yet Kavanaugh didn’t vote to grant cert, despite saying he believes The Court needs to take such a case. Did he think there weren’t five votes for a final decision for plaintiffs, so chose to hit the abort button rather than risk a decision that rolled back Bruen? I agree that Roberts is a ‘waffler’ on the 2A … but I don’t think Roberts is ready to unwind seventeen years of precedent on the 2A. Maybe Roberts just wants The Court to keep a low profile on 2A cases for now while they navigate all this political turmoil and shadow docket cases?

[abinsinia]

Capen v.Campbell, 134 F. 4th 660 (CA1 2025);
National Assn. for Gun Rights v.Lamont, 685 F. Supp. 3d63(Conn.2023),appeal pending,No.23–1162(CA2);
Association of N. J. Rifle & Pistol Clubs, Inc.v.Platkin, 742 F.Supp. 3d 421 (NJ 2024), appeal pending, No. 24–2415 (CA3);
Viramontes v. County of Cook, No. 1:21–cv–4595 (ND Ill., Mar. 1, 2024), appeal pending, No. 24–1437 (CA7);
Miller v.Bonta, 699 F. Supp. 3d 956 (SD Cal. 2023), appeal pending, No. 23–2979 (CA9).

Here are the cases Kavanaugh referenced.

Miller, Viramontes, and ANJRPC are on final judgement. Viramontes had oral arguments last year late November and should have an opinion soon, but there are two Trump judges which mean maybe En Banc.

Miller and ANJRPC haven't had oral arguments yet.