Kolbe v O'Malley being Appealed to CA4

[Haides]

It's been so long I don't even remember where we are in this case anymore. We lost at district, won at the 4th on appeal, and are now waiting for the en banc decision, right?

 

[mxrider]

It's been so long I don't even remember where we are in this case anymore. We lost at district, won at the 4th on appeal, and are now waiting for the en banc decision, right?

That is correct.

 

[Haides]

Thank you lol.

 

[esqappellate]

All I have to say is wow. I would love to live inside your brain for a few days

You would find a mess, I'm afraid.

 

[esqappellate]

And did the court actually apply IS? Or was it actually rational Basis?

Or is that a state secret

Intermediate. Also known as pixie dust cuz, viola, it always leads to the desired result

 

[pcfixer]

Intermediate. Also known as pixie dust cuz, viola, it always leads to the desired result

Like your humor and sarcasm!

 

[Not_an_outlaw]

Intermediate. Also known as pixie dust cuz, viola, it always leads to the desired result

That is so true. Rational basis and strict scrutiny are easy to explain and define. Everything in the middle (intermediate) is just mush.

 

[fightinbluhen51]

And did the court actually apply IS? Or was it actually rational Basis?

Or is that a state secret

The Russians did it.

 

[Blacksmith101]

Just for grins I went back and checked the first post in this thread is dated September 10th, 2014, 12:36 PM which was the day after the notice of appeal was sent.

I think that was about 2 weeks ago.

 

[Schipperke]

I just listened to the oral argument. Quite a few judges seem dead set against strict scrutiny on this. One can't even be sold the difference between military and civilian versions is auto v semi-auto.

 

[j_h_smith]

I just listened to the oral argument. Quite a few judges seem dead set against strict scrutiny on this. One can't even be sold the difference between military and civilian versions is auto v semi-auto.

We're in trouble then.

 

[tomh]

We're in trouble then.

I think it all depends on how you look at it. With Maryland being how they are, it is going to have to come from the Supreme Court to finally fix it in any case.

 

[dblas]

I just listened to the oral argument. Quite a few judges seem dead set against strict scrutiny on this. One can't even be sold the difference between military and civilian versions is auto v semi-auto.

Listening to the orals really doesn't convey the body language and other tells from actually being there. I still call it 60/40 for us.

 

[esqappellate]

Listening to the orals really doesn't convey the body language and other tells from actually being there. I still call it 60/40 for us.

I agree that watching is preferable to just listening to a tape. So, let's all hope that dblas is right. All I can say is that, as a statistical matter, few panel decisions survive en banc review. The only wild card is that, after en banc was granted, the SCT decided Caetano. That decision might cause a few judges to rethink the wisdom of granting en banc. We shall see.

 

[MD_3%er]

Any idea on how long the en banc decision can take? Is there a time limit?

 

[esqappellate]

Any idea on how long the en banc decision can take? Is there a time limit?

The time is whatever it takes. The 4th Circuit is pretty quick compared to other circuits (like the 9th). My *guess* is that we will have a decision well before the anniversary date of the argument (May). Folks need to understand that en banc is necessarily a very time consuming process compared to panel decisions, if only because the issue is important and every active judge on the entire court (as opposed to a 3 judge panel) has to decide the issue. That virtually guarantees dissents and concurring opinions (except in very rare cases). And since nothing is actually decided until the en banc decision is actually released, every judge is angling to persuade the other judges on an issue of importance, all in effort to get a majority opinion of the full court (or a max number of judges in a dissenting opinion). So draft opinions and dissents are constantly circulating. Remember, the judges all understand that if it is important enough to take en banc, it may be also important enough for cert. So the opinions are all being written with an eye toward the possibility of SCT review. Recall that the issue before the full court is the standard of review (strict scrutiny vs. intermediate scrutiny). That sort of issue is really prime for SCT review, especially since it doesn't necessarily (as least technically it doesn't) decide the actual outcome (recall that the panel remanded for application of strict scrutiny).

 

[j_h_smith]

The time is whatever it takes. The 4th Circuit is pretty quick compared to other circuits (like the 9th). My *guess* is that we will have a decision well before the anniversary date of the argument (May). Folks need to understand that en banc is necessarily a very time consuming process compared to panel decisions, if only because the issue is important and every active judge on the entire court (as opposed to a 3 judge panel) has to decide the issue. That virtually guarantees dissents and concurring opinions (except in very rare cases). And since nothing is actually decided until the en banc decision is actually released, every judge is angling to persuade the other judges on an issue of importance, all in effort to get a majority opinion of the full court (or a max number of judges in a dissenting opinion). So draft opinions and dissents are constantly circulating. Remember, the judges all understand that if it is important enough to take en banc, it may be also important enough for cert. So the opinions are all being written with an eye toward the possibility of SCT review. Recall that the issue before the full court is the standard of review (strict scrutiny vs. intermediate scrutiny). That sort of issue is really prime for SCT review, especially since it doesn't necessarily (as least technically it doesn't) decide the actual outcome (recall that the panel remanded for application of strict scrutiny).

Just to let you know, you're my new best friend.

 

[MD_3%er]

The time is whatever it takes. The 4th Circuit is pretty quick compared to other circuits (like the 9th). My *guess* is that we will have a decision well before the anniversary date of the argument (May). Folks need to understand that en banc is necessarily a very time consuming process compared to panel decisions, if only because the issue is important and every active judge on the entire court (as opposed to a 3 judge panel) has to decide the issue. That virtually guarantees dissents and concurring opinions (except in very rare cases). And since nothing is actually decided until the en banc decision is actually released, every judge is angling to persuade the other judges on an issue of importance, all in effort to get a majority opinion of the full court (or a max number of judges in a dissenting opinion). So draft opinions and dissents are constantly circulating. Remember, the judges all understand that if it is important enough to take en banc, it may be also important enough for cert. So the opinions are all being written with an eye toward the possibility of SCT review. Recall that the issue before the full court is the standard of review (strict scrutiny vs. intermediate scrutiny). That sort of issue is really prime for SCT review, especially since it doesn't necessarily (as least technically it doesn't) decide the actual outcome (recall that the panel remanded for application of strict scrutiny).

Thank you!

 

[motorcoachdoug]

I also cant help but wonder if they are thinking the political claimant is changing from anti 2a in Wash DC to a very favorable position for 2A since Trump will become POTUS and he wants to appoint a very friendly SCJ as well.It might also change their thinking on how they rule and do they use intermediate security or strict security for the ruling.

 

[krucam]

I also cant help but wonder if they are thinking the political claimant is changing from anti 2a in Wash DC to a very favorable position for 2A since Trump will become POTUS and he wants to appoint a very friendly SCJ as well.It might also change their thinking on how they rule and do they use intermediate security or strict security for the ruling.

Less than a 3% chance of that....