What 2A cases ready to petition for cert.?

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!
  • nedsurf

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 8, 2013
    2,204
    What 2A cases are ready to go to file a petition for certiorari at the supreme court? Which ones challenge bans on certain types of firearms? Which ones challenge carry schemes like G&S? Which ones have conflicting opinions among the circuits?
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    Rothery should be at conference in a few weeks.

    The Rogers case from NJ was just released from the 3rd Circuit, so they should be petitioning by the end of the year.
    Both are G & S.
     

    Allen65

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 29, 2013
    7,063
    Anne Arundel County
    Unless I've mistaken, none are at that stage yet and wont be this term. They cover the gamut from bans on rifles and magazines to may-issue carry.
    The closest at the moment is Young v Hawaii which has to do with HI's de facto ban on carry. Currently waiting to see if the 9th Circuit takes the case En Banc.

    Has the 9th ever not en banc'ed a 2A case that won at the Circuit level?
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,407
    The Mance v. Sessions case is big. Rehearing denied in a very close split on July 20, 2018. Petition now due Nov. 19, 2018, as extended.
     

    wolfwood

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 24, 2011
    1,361
    Pena v Lindly ie the CA handgun roster case.
    I think that has the best chance of getting cert right now.
    51 page disent wasn't written just for fun
     

    nedsurf

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 8, 2013
    2,204
    Thanks for posting up cases everyone! I figured this thread would become a good reference for reading slip opinions. The next 2-5 years I hope to read some good SC opinions that hopefully affects Maryland 's 2A predicament.
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
     
    Last edited:

    pcfixer

    Ultimate Member
    May 24, 2009
    5,947
    Marylandstan
    Prayer for relief soon......The Second Amendment is neither second class, nor second rate, nor second tier. The “right of the people to keep and bear Arms” has no need of penumbras or emanations. It’s right there, 27 words enshrined for 227 years. [Id. at 396 (Willett, J., dissenting).]
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    I'm not sure if this is posted somewhere else but I saw this case

    "The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear an appeal from an immigrant in the country illegally who was convicted of unlawfully possessing a gun."

    https://thehill.com/regulation/cour...-hear-illegal-immigrants-appeal-of-gun-charge

    Hmm...

    A write up on this one:
    https://www.scotusblog.com/2019/01/eight-new-grants-ginsburg-recovery-from-surgery-on-track/

    In Rehaif v. United States, the justices agreed to decide whether, when the government prosecutes a noncitizen who is in the United States illegally for violating a federal law prohibiting him from having guns or ammunition, the government must show that the defendant knew he was in the country illegally, or whether it is enough to show that the defendant knew he had the guns or ammunition.

    The question arose in the case of Hamid Mohamed Ahmed Ali Rehaif, a citizen of the United Arab Emirates, who came to the United States on a student visa but was dismissed from school – and, as a result, was no longer in the country legally. Several months later, Rehaif was arrested and charged with having ammunition in his hotel room; he was convicted and sentenced to 18 months in prison. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit upheld Rehaif’s sentence, rejecting his argument that he could only be convicted if he knew that he was in the country illegally.
     

    pcfixer

    Ultimate Member
    May 24, 2009
    5,947
    Marylandstan
    https://billofrightsinstitute.org/e...-court-cases-elessons/marbury-v-madison-1803/


    The case of Marbury v. Madison (1803)
    was the first time the U.S. Supreme Court declared an act of Congress to be unconstitutional. (The case concerned a section of the Judiciary Act of 1789.) In his opinion, Chief Justice John Marshall relied almost exclusively on the specific language of the Constitution, saying that it was the “paramount law of the nation” and that it constrained the actions of all three branches of the national government.
    The whole point of a written Constitution, Marshall asserted, was to ensure that government stayed within its prescribed limits: “The powers of the Legislature are defined and limited; and [so] that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the Constitution is written.” In cases where a law conflicted with the Constitution, Marshall wrote, then “the very essence of judicial duty” was to follow the Constitution.
    Marshall also asserted that the courts had the responsibility to understand and articulate what the Constitution means: “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.” The decision concluded “a law repugnant to the Constitution is void, and courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.”
    The Supreme Court did not declare another act of Congress unconstitutional until it struck down the Missouri Compromise in Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857). The power of judicial review was used sparingly for the next several decades. Beginning in the early 20th Century, however, the Court began striking down federal laws more often than ever before. Proponents of judicial review pointed to Chief Justice John Marshall’s decision in Marbury as a source supporting the view that the Supreme Court has the final say on what the Constitution means.

    Since then, as the powers of the national government have expanded and as more and more state laws became subject to federal review (as a result of the Fourteenth Amendment and the incorporation of the protections of the Bill of Rights against the states), the Supreme Court has had frequent opportunities to exercise its power of judicial review.


    So, Why aren't our lawyers and attorney's following this Judicial review case?
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,915
    Messages
    7,258,452
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom