Brooklyn
I stand with John Locke.
Holy hell folks.. I told you he would need to do this..its all noise.
I find it hard to believe Hogan would push to do anything more to restrict our rights. Brown has been pounding the gun control drum hard and Hogan has to placate voters on the issue, since it's one of the few inflammatory issues that might increase turnout for Brown.
But saying SB-281 "doesn't go far enough" is going too far. I am willing to tolerate some spin but am rather disgusted at that statement. And now of course Brown is using it to his advantage and accusing Hogan of flip-flopping.
I find it hard to believe Hogan would push to do anything more to restrict our rights. Brown has been pounding the gun control drum hard and Hogan has to placate voters on the issue, since it's one of the few inflammatory issues that might increase turnout for Brown.
But saying SB-281 "doesn't go far enough" is going too far. I am willing to tolerate some spin but am rather disgusted at that statement. And now of course Brown is using it to his advantage and accusing Hogan of flip-flopping.
With Chief Justice John Roberts presiding over the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals and with a 5-4 vote, the Roberts bench showed that 2nd Amendment rights extends from federal law into State and city limits.
If they use the SC's decision from 2010, a decision to throw it back down to the lower courts for better clarification could be in order or they could uphold the 2010 language in the SC and force repeal of SB281.
I'm not a lawyer or expert; I only play one on TV.
Source: http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/supreme-court-holds-2nd-amendment-applies-to-the-states/
Just out of curiousity ... does the election impact this lawsuit ? And will the case be renamed Kolbe vs. Hogan ???
Hogan will have hire a special lawyer, to keep Frosh out of the mix.
That twist would make this case even more interesting
Having an architect of the challenged law acting as counsel defending the law....that would be interesting but probably won't happen.
Having an architect of the challenged law acting as counsel defending the law....that would be interesting but probably won't happen.
To the contrary, that is exactly what will happen. There is no conflict. Don't forget that the AG is a separately elected official from the Gov.
No precedent/requirement for recusal? I personally would love to have the "rookie" appellate attorney go against Sweeney...