Good observation. Thank you.I just realized if the assault weapon law goes away in maryland so does the minimum length of SBR's. As the copy cat weapon part of the law is what bans sbr's under 29 inches.
Good observation. Thank you.I just realized if the assault weapon law goes away in maryland so does the minimum length of SBR's. As the copy cat weapon part of the law is what bans sbr's under 29 inches.
Well, the temperature has warmed up a bit during the day.My SBR just grew a little…temporarily, of course.
A 1968 Capice was my first car. More luxurious than the Impala, but sported a 327 4-barrel.'Capice' means 'do you understand?' in Italian. It's pronounces 'ka-peesh', JFTR.
I just realized if the assault weapon law goes away in maryland so does the minimum length of SBR's. As the copy cat weapon part of the law is what bans sbr's under 29 inches.
Was also my first car.A 1968 Capice was my first car. More luxurious than the Impala, but sported a 327 4-barrel.
Admittedly this is what I'm looking most forward to. There's only like 3 guns I missed out on in 2013.I just realized if the assault weapon law goes away in maryland so does the minimum length of SBR's. As the copy cat weapon part of the law is what bans sbr's under 29 inches.
The judges were listed on the docket for the case yesterday, so I looked them up to see who was who, and what our chances were going to be. Apparently there was a last minute change and Thacker was added in place of someone else, but I'm not sure who - it could have been 3-0 instead of 2-1, although there is a slim chance that because Bruen is written so clearly, that Thacker won't have a choice but to flip and decide in favor of Bianchi.
I be watching this to see if it comes true.I think this is all deliberate politics by 4CA.
Most of the post-Bruen decisions and laws that violate Bruen are by one of two groups of people:
A.) Politicians
or
B.) Low Ranking Judges.
By Contrast, the 4th Circuit Court is pretty much one step below Clarence Thomas; and as such...they know what Big Daddy Clarence wrote; and they know that if they step out of line, Clarence can make life very unpleasant for them.
The guys on Fourth Circuit like being Federal Judges, but at the same time they also like the DC area social cocktail circuit; so they came up with a deal amongst themselves.
They're gonna do a 2-1 decision (instead of 3-0) on Bruen; and when Frosh/MD appeals it for an en banc ruling to all of 4CA, they're gonna turn down the en banc and deny it.
Because if they take Bianchi en banc (like before) then it's not just three justices who are in the firing line, but EVERYONE on 4CA.
And they can't ignore Bruen or Clarence's instructions (which were quite explict); because as I said before, they're just one rung below Clarence; so....like I said, Frosh is going to find en banc DENIED.
Frosh and others who have been used to rare pro-gun wins in circuits being crushed via en banc are about to find out that the rules of the game have changed -- pre Bruen, crushing it en banc was cheap and painless and got a lot of social credit from the cocktail crowd for Circuit Judges.
Now...post-Bruen, the cocktail crowd is going to be disappointed now that circuit judges have some real skin in the game...
I would not be surprised to see the three judges on this case "coast" for a couple years in 4CA, getting the "easy", non controversial cases, in exchange for biting the bullet and doing the deed on this.
Couldn't they just wash their hands of it (for a while, anyway) by remanding it back down to District for additional discovery? That was what the State was pushing for on the "in common use" issue, endless discovery on exactly what firearms are commonly used for self defense. Which shouldn't even be relevant for a THT evaluation, let alone the fact that Heller said in common use for any lawful purpose, not just self defense.I think this is all deliberate politics by 4CA.
Most of the post-Bruen decisions and laws that violate Bruen are by one of two groups of people:
A.) Politicians
or
B.) Low Ranking Judges.
By Contrast, the 4th Circuit Court is pretty much one step below Clarence Thomas; and as such...they know what Big Daddy Clarence wrote; and they know that if they step out of line, Clarence can make life very unpleasant for them.
The guys on Fourth Circuit like being Federal Judges, but at the same time they also like the DC area social cocktail circuit; so they came up with a deal amongst themselves.
They're gonna do a 2-1 decision (instead of 3-0) on Bruen; and when Frosh/MD appeals it for an en banc ruling to all of 4CA, they're gonna turn down the en banc and deny it.
Because if they take Bianchi en banc (like before) then it's not just three justices who are in the firing line, but EVERYONE on 4CA.
And they can't ignore Bruen or Clarence's instructions (which were quite explict); because as I said before, they're just one rung below Clarence; so....like I said, Frosh is going to find en banc DENIED.
Frosh and others who have been used to rare pro-gun wins in circuits being crushed via en banc are about to find out that the rules of the game have changed -- pre Bruen, crushing it en banc was cheap and painless and got a lot of social credit from the cocktail crowd for Circuit Judges.
Now...post-Bruen, the cocktail crowd is going to be disappointed now that circuit judges have some real skin in the game...
I would not be surprised to see the three judges on this case "coast" for a couple years in 4CA, getting the "easy", non controversial cases, in exchange for biting the bullet and doing the deed on this.
This sounds quite hopeful to me.I think this is all deliberate politics by 4CA.
Most of the post-Bruen decisions and laws that violate Bruen are by one of two groups of people:
A.) Politicians
or
B.) Low Ranking Judges.
By Contrast, the 4th Circuit Court is pretty much one step below Clarence Thomas; and as such...they know what Big Daddy Clarence wrote; and they know that if they step out of line, Clarence can make life very unpleasant for them.
The guys on Fourth Circuit like being Federal Judges, but at the same time they also like the DC area social cocktail circuit; so they came up with a deal amongst themselves.
They're gonna do a 2-1 decision (instead of 3-0) on Bruen; and when Frosh/MD appeals it for an en banc ruling to all of 4CA, they're gonna turn down the en banc and deny it.
Because if they take Bianchi en banc (like before) then it's not just three justices who are in the firing line, but EVERYONE on 4CA.
And they can't ignore Bruen or Clarence's instructions (which were quite explict); because as I said before, they're just one rung below Clarence; so....like I said, Frosh is going to find en banc DENIED.
Frosh and others who have been used to rare pro-gun wins in circuits being crushed via en banc are about to find out that the rules of the game have changed -- pre Bruen, crushing it en banc was cheap and painless and got a lot of social credit from the cocktail crowd for Circuit Judges.
Now...post-Bruen, the cocktail crowd is going to be disappointed now that circuit judges have some real skin in the game...
I would not be surprised to see the three judges on this case "coast" for a couple years in 4CA, getting the "easy", non controversial cases, in exchange for biting the bullet and doing the deed on this.
I feel old. My first car was a 57 Ford Fairlane.Was also my first car.
My grandfather always called it "the Cadillac of the Chevrolet line"Was also my first car.
The Rock and Roll detectiveI feel old. My first car was a 57 Ford Fairlane.
Hahahaha.My grandfather always called it "the Cadillac of the Chevrolet line"
The Rock and Roll detective
What are your names. Neil and Bob…………My grandfather always called it "the Cadillac of the Chevrolet line"
The Rock and Roll detective
One of SCOTUS' jobs is to regulate the lower courts -- they don't get deep into the weeds, being very hands off.This sounds quite hopeful to me.
I'm curious how Thomas can make things uncomfortable for a Circuit Court judge?
The change in judges is not a political decision. It was likely due to the fact that Traxler is a senior judge (semiretired). He was replaced by Niemeyer. While Traxler was part of the original Kolbe panel and wrote the en banc dissent in that case, Niemeyer joined that dissent. I do not see the outcome changing based on Niemeyer rather than Traxler.I think this is all deliberate politics by 4CA.
Most of the post-Bruen decisions and laws that violate Bruen are by one of two groups of people:
A.) Politicians
or
B.) Low Ranking Judges.
By Contrast, the 4th Circuit Court is pretty much one step below Clarence Thomas; and as such...they know what Big Daddy Clarence wrote; and they know that if they step out of line, Clarence can make life very unpleasant for them.
The guys on Fourth Circuit like being Federal Judges, but at the same time they also like the DC area social cocktail circuit; so they came up with a deal amongst themselves.
They're gonna do a 2-1 decision (instead of 3-0) on Bruen; and when Frosh/MD appeals it for an en banc ruling to all of 4CA, they're gonna turn down the en banc and deny it.
Because if they take Bianchi en banc (like before) then it's not just three justices who are in the firing line, but EVERYONE on 4CA.
And they can't ignore Bruen or Clarence's instructions (which were quite explict); because as I said before, they're just one rung below Clarence; so....like I said, Frosh is going to find en banc DENIED.
Frosh and others who have been used to rare pro-gun wins in circuits being crushed via en banc are about to find out that the rules of the game have changed -- pre Bruen, crushing it en banc was cheap and painless and got a lot of social credit from the cocktail crowd for Circuit Judges.
Now...post-Bruen, the cocktail crowd is going to be disappointed now that circuit judges have some real skin in the game...
I would not be surprised to see the three judges on this case "coast" for a couple years in 4CA, getting the "easy", non controversial cases, in exchange for biting the bullet and doing the deed on this.
Running out the clock on the four Bruen-remanded cases is the strategy that best serves the Antis' purposes post-Bruen. En banc, remand to District, and let the case sit in discovery and pre-hearing maneuvers indefinitely as the populists who've hijacked the GOP continue to hand the Dems enough general election wins to remake SCOTUS, and the rest of the judiciary, to permanently entrench Progressive and statist philosophies. The Antis know how critical it is that Bianchi not end up back in front of the current SCOTUS.The en banc court is not going to be as accommodating as you suggest. It is still has a majority of judges willing to limit the interpretation of the 2A. We will need to wait for the opinion, but I could see the en banc court kicking any favorable ruling back down to the district court for fact finding.
The typical 4CA case takes about 6 months to decide, which would put the time frame around early March for a opinion based on the typical case.
The change in judges is not a political decision. It was likely due to the fact that Traxler is a senior judge (semiretired). He was replaced by Niemeyer. While Traxler was part of the original Kolbe panel and wrote the en banc dissent in that case, Niemeyer joined that dissent. I do not see the outcome changing based on Niemeyer rather than Traxler.
The en banc court is not going to be as accommodating as you suggest. It is still has a majority of judges willing to limit the interpretation of the 2A. We will need to wait for the opinion, but I could see the en banc court kicking any favorable ruling back down to the district court for fact finding.
What you expect and what you get are two different things.What is the next step? I was expecting a decision by now.
Weeks