They are also stating that California and NJ mag bans need to be reheard.
My wallet won't survive the aftermath!
Doubt it.Is there a chance of getting an injunction that would let us buy in the interim?
How about the new Washington ban
They are also stating that California and NJ mag bans need to be reheard.
My wallet won't survive the aftermath!
There are four criteria that are evaluated.Is there a chance of getting an injunction that would let us buy in the interim?
I think that would have to be a separate lawsuit. There is a big 80% industry. I’d not be surprised to see it.Any chance of ghost gun bans going down?
New lawsuit. The 9th cover WA and CA if I remember right. If 9th strikes down CA’s ban, a lawsuit should be really fast striking down WA’s unless WA can make some really novel arguments as the 9ths decision would be binding on all decisions within the circuit.How about the new Washington ban
Are we starting a pool on which appellate district doesn't go with the flow? 9th may be a bunch of moonbats, but I think 2nd will win the return trip to SCOTUS purely out of arrogance. "Dammit, what part of 'we're NY' don't you understand, Clarence?"SCOTUS is likely to have to weigh in on these cases at some point because some circuit is likely to not get the clear message and there will be a circuit split.
Unknown. 9th was en banc after the appeals court ruled against the state, right? If I am remember right the en banc was something like 7 to 4? Just takes two more judges having gotten the real clear fricken message from SCOTUS to overturn the law.Are we starting a pool on which appellate district doesn't go with the flow? 9th may be a bunch of moonbats, but I think 2nd will win the return trip to SCOTUS purely out of arrogance. "Dammit, what part of 'we're NY' don't you understand, Clarence?"
It is still too early to be sure, but the federal requirements seem like an overreach of authority. The state requirements may be more difficult to challenge. I have this feeling that the lower courts will see the state requirements as typical regulations that can be upheld.Any chance of ghost gun bans going down?
GVR stand for Grant (certiorari) Vacate Remand. The "vacate" part means they are throwing out the lower court's ruling and remanding the issue to them saying "try again with our new guidance". No court in their right mind would return the same result as a previously vacated decision.They did not outright throw out the lower court ruling, they only sent it back for "reconsideration". What does this mean in realistic terms? Are they simply giving the lower courts a path to retract their ruling without forcing a ruling on them?
Additionally as I've read some posts here, these courts would not just willingly reverse these earlier decisions. It requires someone to challenge the ruling in court to get this AWB ban reversed, is that correct?
REALLY hoping to get myself an ar180 one of these days...
So then it is looking hopeful for us, only a matter of time. How long do you anticipate this process to take?GVR stand for Grant (certiorari) Vacate Remand. The "vacate" part means they are throwing out the lower court's ruling and remanding the issue to them saying "try again with our new guidance". No court in their right mind would return the same result as a previously vacated decision.
The justices also sent back for further review a case from Maryland that challenged the state's 2013 ban on 45 kinds of assault weapons. The high court had in 2017 turned away a previous challenge to the law.
The same result on remand is actually reached fairly often after a gvr. And sometimes the Ct grants cert a second timeGVR stand for Grant (certiorari) Vacate Remand. The "vacate" part means they are throwing out the lower court's ruling and remanding the issue to them saying "try again with our new guidance". No court in their right mind would return the same result as a previously vacated decision.