VICTORY IN PALMER!!!!

[TxAggie]

My favorite is that the city argued both that the district is too dangerous to allow more guns on the streets, and also that the police do such a good job protecting people that no one needs to be armed.

Haha, I didn't catch that, but you're right.

- the city so dangerous, we can't allow citizens guns
- the police department is just so damn good, everyone in DC is already safe

Yep, makes sense to me!

 

[Inigoes]

I'm trying to catch up on this: if Sculin doesn't announce a decision on reevaluating his ruling today (or in the "near" future) can DC still file an appeal? From how I've interpreted what everyone has said, DC cannot file an appeal now because they requested a review by the judge and are now forced to wait for his decision on review before they can file an appeal. Am I even close to having this right?

I don't think so. Judge Scullin has to rule on DC's motion for reconsideration first, before the 30 day appeal clock starts.

"If I understand" the technical aspects listed in this thread correctly.

 

[JohnnyE]

Haha, I didn't catch that, but you're right.

- the city so dangerous, we can't allow citizens guns
- the police department is just so damn good, everyone in DC is already safe

Yep, makes sense to me!

Arguing in the alternative, just like Jake, (roll to 1:13, one of these explains it):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aY4YOsjCI-Q

 

[TxAggie]

I don't think so. Judge Scullin has to rule on DC's motion for reconsideration first, before the 30 day appeal clock starts.



"If I understand" the technical aspects listed in this thread correctly.

But can they file an appeal if he doesn't rule, or do they simply have a 30 day maximum to file once he does rule?

 

[krucam]

But can they file an appeal if he doesn't rule, or do they simply have a 30 day maximum to file once he does rule?

The deadline to appeal now hinges on the resolution of the ongoing Motion to Reconsider, specifically from FRAP Rule 4(a)(4):

(4) Effect of a Motion on a Notice of Appeal.

(A) If a party timely files in the district court any of the
following motions under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
the time to file an appeal runs for all parties from
the entry of the order disposing of the last such remaining
motion.​

They can file the Notice of Appeal to Circuit at any time, from now up until the 30 days after entry of order disposing of the Motion. I'm guessing that IF they did appeal before the ruling on the Motion to Reconsider, that Motion would die. Then the original Order becomes the appealed ruling.

 

[swinokur]

As I understand it, yes. DC cannot actually appeal since they asked the Judge to reconsider. Until he disposes of that request, the issue is still in his court and DC cannot appeal.

And there is no time limit for that as I understand it. IMHO, DC was really dumb to do this because I think they were lookiing at a way to stall things, but it could blow up in their face.

As pointed out, Scullin could wait until the 90 days is almost up, then issue his ruling. DC still has to craft a law before those 90 days are up.

IANAL and all this could be incorrect.

 

[TxAggie]

The deadline to appeal now hinges on the resolution of the ongoing Motion to Reconsider, specifically from FRAP Rule 4(a)(4):





They can file the Notice of Appeal to Circuit at any time, from now up until the 30 days after entry of order disposing of the Motion. I'm guessing that IF they did appeal before the ruling on the Motion to Reconsider, that Motion would die. Then the original Order becomes the appealed ruling.

As I understand it, yes. DC cannot actually appeal since they asked the Judge to reconsider. Until he disposes of that request, the issue is still in his court and DC cannot appeal.

And there is no time limit for that as I understand it. IMHO, DC was really dumb to do this because I think they were lookiing at a way to stall things, but it could blow up in their face.

As pointed out, Scullin could wait until the 90 days is almost up, then issue his ruling. DC still has to craft a law before those 90 days are up.

IANAL and all this could be incorrect.

Well hell, now I'm back in the same state of confusion. But, I'm an Aggie, so that's a common occurrence!

 

[swinokur]

I just describe it as a kerfuffle.

That helps me with my confusion too.

 

[TxAggie]

I can't even pronounce kurfl....kerfluff..... Damn, can't spell it either.

 

[joppaj]

I can't even pronounce kurfl....kerfluff..... Damn, can't spell it either.

Go with "goat rope".

 

[Inigoes]

Go with "goat rope".

What did it do, to provoke that?

The WTF goat is an innocent bystander

 

[Brooklyn]

As I understand it, yes. DC cannot actually appeal since they asked the Judge to reconsider. Until he disposes of that request, the issue is still in his court and DC cannot appeal.

And there is no time limit for that as I understand it. IMHO, DC was really dumb to do this because I think they were lookiing at a way to stall things, but it could blow up in their face.

As pointed out, Scullin could wait until the 90 days is almost up, then issue his ruling. DC still has to craft a law before those 90 days are up.

IANAL and all this could be incorrect.

Something about this makes me cautious. While I agree based on what I know, this is a very stupid move if this is so.. I don't think lawyers at this level could be that foolish.. .so I worry that, as laymen we are missing something....

 

[swinokur]

One word

Heller.

 

[krucam]

Well hell, now I'm back in the same state of confusion. But, I'm an Aggie, so that's a common occurrence!

Neither of us being lawyers, take it as it is. Layman's interpretations. You get what you pay for.

My spidey sense is telling me that an Appeal isn't likely. They appear to be just kicking the "crafting legislation" thing down the road as the accepted eventual end.

If I were a rabid anti-gunner I would seriously look at the Appeal option as that would be the easiest way to maintain the status quo for a year or two. The risk would be minimal as well.

 

[swinokur]

Well there would be the risk of the Circuit not granting a stay pending appeal. Then it's constitutional carry for however long that process takes. I'd bet DC wouldn't want that as " blood in the streets" could not be used to bolster their public safety argument.

 

[TxAggie]

Go with "goat rope".

Now THAT'S a phrase I understand!

 

[Brooklyn]

Neither of us being lawyers, take it as it is. Layman's interpretations. You get what you pay for.

My spidey sense is telling me that an Appeal isn't likely. They appear to be just kicking the "crafting legislation" thing down the road as the accepted eventual end.

If I were a rabid anti-gunner I would seriously look at the Appeal option as that would be the easiest way to maintain the status quo for a year or two. The risk would be minimal as well.

The risk is not minimal.. Scotus is more likely to take a case that is a total ban..vs may issue.

It may even cause them to take the HI case. They need to keep this way from scotus. They know they have been BS ing the lower courts.. I pity the fool that tries that in front of the 9..

 

[TxAggie]

Neither of us being lawyers, take it as it is. Layman's interpretations. You get what you pay for.



My spidey sense is telling me that an Appeal isn't likely. They appear to be just kicking the "crafting legislation" thing down the road as the accepted eventual end.



If I were a rabid anti-gunner I would seriously look at the Appeal option as that would be the easiest way to maintain the status quo for a year or two. The risk would be minimal as well.

But I didn't pay anything for it........oh, got it!

So as it stands now at this moment, they have till the end of the 90 day stay to enact legislation, else Constitution Carry is enacted by default.

I'm getting better at interpreting this legal stuff, but it sure is a lot more complicated than giving your word and shaking on it.

 

[Inigoes]

If I were a rabid anti-gunner I would seriously look at the Appeal option as that would be the easiest way to maintain the status quo for a year or two. The risk would be minimal as well.

The rabid antigunners are applying tremendous pressure to DC not to appeal. They feel that if the SCOTUS is going to accept any carry case, it will be this one.

 

[Brooklyn]

Well there would be the risk of the Circuit not granting a stay pending appeal. Then it's constitutional carry for however long that process takes. I'd bet DC wouldn't want that as "no blood in the streets" could not be used to bolster their public safety argument.

No that stay is likely. Politically anyway. And not even op force really belives the blood in the street argument although the nit wit moms do they believe in smart bullets to ... they can't risk have scotus take a bundle of these cases and clean house by setting a standard of review.... hell I think we are getting close...