Kolbe v O'Malley being Appealed to CA4

[dogbone]

Here's the shamelessly biased and fact-lacking take from the WaPo http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...527976-d24d-11e4-ab77-9646eea6a4c7_story.html

I thought my head hurt after reading the article... now, I'm sorry I didn't have enough sense not to peek at the comments. The distinct absence of rational discourse has been noted.

 

[fightinbluhen51]

Sweeny is our lawyer, don't remember the guys name standing up on the States side other than AG Frosh sitting there.

Matt Fadded (or fader).

 

[JPG]

Could the court go one step further and say that the whole Maryland Regulated Gun List (AKA Handgun Roster) is unconstitutional?

 

[DC-W]

Interesting that our state's largest newspaper hasn't a peep about the hearing...

 

[Gryphon]

Could the court go one step further and say that the whole Maryland Regulated Gun List (AKA Handgun Roster) is unconstitutional?

Sorry, to my knowledge not before the court, so not at issue.

 

[Mr H]

Sorry, to my knowledge not before the court, so not at issue.

That would have an effect in several other states, and I have a vague memory of it maybe having been challenged before??

 

[Kharn]

Could the court go one step further and say that the whole Maryland Regulated Gun List (AKA Handgun Roster) is unconstitutional?

My understanding is there are no more regulated rifles, everything is either banned or unbanned, so if the ban gets the axe, all rifles would be just a 4473 and a NICS check.

 

[Kharn]

That would have an effect in several other states, and I have a vague memory of it maybe having been challenged before??

Pena v Cid, in California. We lost at the district court.

 

[Jaybeez]

My understanding is there are no more regulated rifles, everything is either banned or unbanned, so if the ban gets the axe, all rifles would be just a 4473 and a NICS check.

my understanding was sb281's rifle ban repealed and replaced regulated rifles. strike those portions of legislative sausage and things go back to what they were. 77r and 7 day wait.

for now, thats fine. regulated rifles is an argument for our side in this case. they were a less restrictive means of achieving the state's goal of public safety without having an outright ban. one argument says they need ti prove there was no less restrictive means than a ban. and regulated rifles shows that there was.

 

[DC-W]

Ah, technically the Sun did cover the hearing, but it's a pretty short story written before the hearing by the AP
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/ma...-us--gun-control-maryland-20150325-story.html

 

[balttigger]

I thought my head hurt after reading the article... now, I'm sorry I didn't have enough sense not to peek at the comments. The distinct absence of rational discourse has been noted.

I have been doing my best to bring some rational thought to those comments, but the morons are beating me with their experience in irrational thought processes.

 

[Schipperke]

Here's the shamelessly biased and fact-lacking take from the WaPo http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...527976-d24d-11e4-ab77-9646eea6a4c7_story.html

I'm not sure where the bias was, but this is new to me;

“the court seriously doubts that the banned assault long guns are commonly possessed for lawful purposes, particularly self-defense in the home, which is at the core of the Second Amendment right.”

How did that judge get away with defining the 2A that way? Self defense in the home is the core of the 2A ? Doubting something is enough to rule? If you take the number of "banned guns" not used illegally, then aren't the rest assumed to being used legally? That would include having one and locking it away and never firing it, in my view.

 

[Jaybeez]

I'm not sure where the bias was, but this is new to me;

“the court seriously doubts that the banned assault long guns are commonly possessed for lawful purposes, particularly self-defense in the home, which is at the core of the Second Amendment right.”

How did that judge get away with defining the 2A that way? Self defense in the home is the core of the 2A ? Doubting something is enough to rule? If you take the number of "banned guns" not used illegally, then aren't the rest assumed to being used legally? That would include having one and locking it away and never firing it, in my view.

Judge Blake's decision was a punt. she took all the state's arguments at face value, and ignored all of the plantiff's arguments. she basically said "not it" and passed the case along. her ruling was so short and so devoid of any reasoning, that it demands another look by the 4th circuit by that fact alone.
the fact that she ignored all the judicial precendent in Chester, and both of the majority opinions from Chester are hearing kolbe's appeal, are just icing on the cake.

 

[swinokur]

IMO Blake figured either side would appeal, so just gave it the boot out of her court. Her reasoning is pretty bad IMO but I think she just wanted to get rid of it.

 

[FrankZ]

IMO Blake figured either side would appeal, so just gave it the boot out of her court. Her reasoning is pretty bad IMO but I think she just wanted to get rid of it.

Good enough reason for her to be booted from the court. I don't care if she knew it would be appealed, the legal process demands rigorous review and adherence to the principles of law.

This happens when people do their job without fear of reprisal.

 

[Gambler]

IMO Blake figured either side would appeal, so just gave it the boot out of her court. Her reasoning is pretty bad IMO but I think she just wanted to get rid of it.

So she's just lazy? How do these people keep their jobs?

 

[swinokur]

It was just my opinion, not a fact. She certainly seemed to chose to ignore the popularity of the AR based on facts. She accepted MD's argument without much scrutiny IMO. Her reasoning seems flawed based on the inaccuracy of the state's stipulation of the facts.

But being immune from political interference is an important part of the judiciary, no matter our feelings about her decision.

 

[Mr H]

Good enough reason for her to be booted from the court. I don't care if she knew it would be appealed, the legal process demands rigorous review and adherence to the principles of law.

This happens when people don't do their job without because they know there's no fear of reprisal.

...

 

[dblas]

Trexler & Agee were appointed by HW and GW, both served in the Army. Likely pro-2A?

King is a Clinton appointee

King was asking some very pointed a good questions of the state (Fader) as well as our side (Sweeney), don't sell him short just because of his appointment.

 

[dblas]

another judge agee and trexler opinion, us v white
http://www.google.com/url?url=http:...YQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNEEp0SVqTBve3PBbJYjO9Wbyk0pqA

us v chester 2A case, trexler opinion
http://www.google.com/url?url=http:...oQFjAD&usg=AFQjCNHOTGsgeVbllD7d_pjdy7Wj_KqWiQ

our side's briefs quote us v chester extensively

And we brought up Chester and Mascdaro in the orals as well.