Goodbye Sykes v. McGinness

[yellowfin]

Originally Posted by krucam

And for the second time today, I feel we have a "game/set/match" here...

Presuming the Circuit court is honest and not capable and ready to contort some kind of totally off the wall tangential nonsense to declare the other side the winner simply because that's who they want to win. As I recall, the whole reason we're in the mess we're in now is because of courts playing way out of bounds in Slaughterhouse, Cruikshank, Plessy, Carolene, Miller, and Wickard. As just one example as to how ridiculous they'll go, for 60 years the Supreme Court officially ruled 3 times that Major League Baseball wasn't a business, the latter two times purely on the basis of them having said so previously.

[press1280]

Originally Posted by yellowfin

Presuming the Circuit court is honest and not capable and ready to contort some kind of totally off the wall tangential nonsense to declare the other side the winner simply because that's who they want to win. As I recall, the whole reason we're in the mess we're in now is because of courts playing way out of bounds in Slaughterhouse, Cruikshank, Plessy, Carolene, Miller, and Wickard. As just one example as to how ridiculous they'll go, for 60 years the Supreme Court officially ruled 3 times that Major League Baseball wasn't a business, the latter two times purely on the basis of them having said so previously.

It all depends on the panel. Nordyke just seems like such a mess that it's hard to predict how it'll influence this case. At the very least, make it quick and appealable to SCOTUS. I don't want some gobbley-gook designed just to send it back down to district and stall another year.

[Patrick]

California's Peruta showed the path the court could take to quash the complaint for now: find that the right exists in some form and then assign it rational basis scrutiny that is called 'intermediate scrutiny' in name only. Expect no evidence proving the government restriction is truly required and that the restriction will solve the problem they propose.

This is basically a more bold version of the 2A Two-Step and according to Nordyke - completely legit.

[krucam]

And just as in Peruta, Richards will go into hiatus until Nordyke is resolved.

Nordyke Oral's are scheduled for the week of 3/9/12 last I saw...

12/20/2011 40 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: HL): The court stays proceedings in this appeal pending this court’s en banc decision in Nordyke v. King, No. 07-15763, 2011 WL 5928130 (9th Cir. Nov. 28, 2011) (granting rehearing en banc). [8006418] (WL)

[press1280]

Originally Posted by krucam

And just as in Peruta, Richards will go into hiatus until Nordyke is resolved.

Nordyke Oral's are scheduled for the week of 3/9/12 last I saw...

Looks like Richards and Peruta are being sent near the back of the line in the race to SCOTUS..........

[yellowfin]

These people are the pros in procrastination.

[krucam]

With Nordyke "out of the way", there were 2 Carry cases before CA9 (now 3 with Birdt, now 4 with Hawaii's Baker), Sykes, errr Richards & Peruta.

Getting a little crowded...

Calguns Foundation (CGF) is behind the Richards case, with a little help from some Gura guy. Paul Clement (poss NRA sponsorship) is behind Peruta.

For the 2nd time in a little over a month, CGF asks the court to consolidate with Peruta as was to be the case before the Nordyke induced Stay, and they ask to be Unstayed....

05/25/2012 44 Filed (ECF) Appellants Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards, Second Amendment Foundation and Brett Stewart Motion to hear this case before the panel which will hear case 10-56971. Date of service: 05/25/2012. [8191806] (DK)

06/04/2012 45 Filed (ECF) Appellants Calguns Foundation, Inc., Adam Richards, Second Amendment Foundation and Brett Stewart Motion to hear this case before the panel which will hear case 10-56971. Date of service: 06/04/2012. [8200863] (DK)

[yellowfin]

I wonder how quickly the unstaying can be done. Any knowledge on this?

[esqappellate]

Originally Posted by yellowfin

I wonder how quickly the unstaying can be done. Any knowledge on this?

I would expect an order quite soon, setting a briefing schedule.

[krucam]

Richards nee Sykes is moving again. The Richards docket entry to unstay also appears on the Peruta docket, which remains stayed. Strange, unless one assumes they're going to grant the consolidation request.

06/19/2012 46 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: GS): The appellants’ motion to lift the stay of appellate proceedings in No. 11- 16255 is granted. The stay of appellate proceedings is lifted in No. 11-16255. [8220426] [10-56971, 11-16255] (SM)

[Gray Peterson]

Originally Posted by esqappellate

I would expect an order quite soon, setting a briefing schedule.

No need for briefing. That's already done. They just need oral arguments.

[krucam]

Officially "unstayed", looks like Richards and Peruta will be heard before the same panel, ala Moore/Sheppard at CA7.

06/29/2012 47 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: GS): The stay of appellate proceedings has been lifted in No. 11-16255. Pursuant to the June 20, 2011 order, Nos. 10-56971 and 11-16255 shall be calendared before the same panel if practicable. Therefore, the appellant's request in the June 4, 2012 motion is denied as unnecessary. [8232590] (WL)

[krucam]

Audio for today's Oral Arguments in SAFs case (Richards):
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/vi..._id=0000010111