The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Yes,,,Split In the 4th Woollard v Gallagher (12-1437) cert denied 2013 and there are other cases as well.
- Feb 19, 2013
- 18,842
I have to sweep the car before wife or I go to DC. Having a few rounds floating around, and get arrested is twilight zone material. If a permit helps there, then yes worth it.
danb
dont be a dumbass
If D.C. declines to appeal, we get a much more clear circuit split. Odds of them taking the next carry case go way up. Maybe even Norman (FL carry).
D.C. is facing a false choice. A carry case is highly likely to get to the Supreme Court now that we have a clear split. It will be D.C.'s case, or some other. The question is, does D.C. want to be blamed... again. Or let someone else be a bad guy.
DC politicians only have to answer to their voters, not voters or AG's in other states.
They will ask for CERT.
My .02
They will ask for CERT.
My .02
whistlersmother
Peace through strength
DC has 90 days to appeal, by that time Norman's fate will be decided.
danb
dont be a dumbass
DC has seven days to file for a stay of the mandate I thought, pending appeal. Esteemed esqappellate noted above, it's probably bad form to ask for a stay of the Mandate in order to appeal and then not appeal. Illinois as I recall ask for a stay in order to have time to enact appropriate legislation. That's not the case here, DC doesn't need to do anything. I think they need to reveal their approach when they ask for the stay. The Washington Post article seems to indicate this as well.
Personally I think the odds of them taking Norman are up significantly now, either way.
I don't think that's quite correct. The Court's order takes effect 7 days after the order is issued. DC can ask the court for a stay after that. They still have 90 days to ask for CERT. If they don't ask for a stay or it's denied. then DC is shall issue until such time that a stay is issued, if one is issued.
Esq will correct me again if I'm wrong
Esq will correct me again if I'm wrong
danb
dont be a dumbass
Point is, when they ask for a stay they give a reason (e.g. to appeal or enact regulations). They will reveal their hand.
My guess is they don't have any new cards to play. They will use their old arguments again, as they can't seem to come up with a more cohesive argument than the ones they have already used.
Won't be long now at any rate.
Won't be long now at any rate.
Tomorrow is 7 days after the denial.
Elliotte
Ultimate Member
Their best bet is an emotional appeal and hoping that after the attack in Vegas, they can tug on the heartstrings of Kennedy or Roberts enough to flip one of them.
The biggest reason I think we haven't seen any 2A cases other than the Stun Gun one is both extremes (the 4 antis and the 3 conservatives) can't guarantee a 5th vote for their side. Not wanting to lose more ground, they hold out and turn down cases hoping they can swing momentum their way.
Putting on my prognostication hat, I'm going to predict DC will request CERT from SCOTUS and make a motion to stay the Circuit Court decision until the court decides on CERT or hears the case.
Friday
Friday
I think DC will do a bonehead again.
They will request a stay, without notifying the court of intention to petition for cert.
danb
dont be a dumbass
Betting on D.C. doing something boneheaded is always a winner.
I've canvased about half of the 20 DC gun owners I know. Most will get a carry permit for that general reason. There are many aspects of DC law where the citizen is overexposed to subjective decisions by a police officer or even a prosecutor as to many aspects of compliance even for traveling back and forth to the range
Their MO is bonehead and I'm hoping they do another. It betters the chance of this going nationwide. I don't think Roberts and Alito are going to vote for cert unless they get a favorable read on Kennedy and the four liberals think he's too much of a "conservative" to trust him on guns.
Indeed, there is little reason for them not to even if they at likely to lose.
I don't think either DC or Gura is looking at just DC.
DC officials are not spending their own money, and it being a political issue helps them raise party money, third party c4 and 527 money, gun conlt lobby which is dark money and in-house DNC/DCC ops in all but name, get free media, etc
To me the real questions are, are their any paths for gura delay this, til 2018-19?
I think we see a petition for cert and an easily granted stay, and we will be onto tea leaf reading on who is looks to be slow walking, who is fast tracking. And actually perhaps knowing the outcome on weather Kennedy hires another clerk since they don't hire a second clerk for the following term if they are planning to retire.
If Roberts takes any action that indicates he supports fast tracking of this then that is a bad omen. If he is not going to support shall issue, he wont want to delay and be alone with the left wing of the court, he will want Kennedy there for a 6:3 that supports "may issue" definitively.
I just think Peruta shows Kennedy is opposed to forcing shall issue. if we had Kennedy it would be done then and there. it took a very rare twelve conferences to even decide to deny or grant cert. If Kennedy was opposed to good cause it would have moved forward. if he preferred the status quo he simply could have hinted to the two wings that if forced by one wing he would vote against them.
Best possible outcome for gun control lobby is to get this in, and to do so this term. Best likely outcomes for second amendment supporters is if this is delayed to 18-19.
