En banc Decision in Peruta -- a loss

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!
  • GlocksAndPatriots

    Banned
    BANNED!!!
    Aug 29, 2016
    763
    I still don't understand how they did not get 4 votes for cert. Obviously Thomas and Gorsuch voted for it. Where were Roberts and Alito? Where were the liberal justices? I would assume they would vote for cert so they could uphold the 9ths ruling. And if, as some suggest, there is some magical agreement to reject cert until conservatives are certain they can win the case (which I think is wishful thinking) then why did Thomas and Gorsuch dissent?

    My guess is because Thomas and Gorsuch are more principled. They don't want the court playing games. If granting cert means that bad laws are upheld, that's better than leaving it in limbo. I'm a bit surprised about Alito though. Roberts is a POS, and we all know that. But Alito generally is principled and doesn't care what the left thinks of him.
     

    Elliotte

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 11, 2011
    1,207
    Loudoun County VA
    I still don't understand how they did not get 4 votes for cert. Obviously Thomas and Gorsuch voted for it. Where were Roberts and Alito? Where were the liberal justices? I would assume they would vote for cert so they could uphold the 9ths ruling. And if, as some suggest, there is some magical agreement to reject cert until conservatives are certain they can win the case (which I think is wishful thinking) then why did Thomas and Gorsuch dissent?

    I'm a little surprised Alito didn't join in the dissent. I think everyone on the court is unsure how a new gun case would go. From the Libs perspective, Roberts & Kennedy have twice supported gun rights, so I doubt the Libs want to give them a chance to make it 3. From the pro-2A side, Roberts & Kennedy have been wishy-washy and sided with the Libs on non-2A cases that should have been conservative wins. For right now, it seems like neither side wants to take another gun case unless they can be certain they have 5 votes for a win. At this level, a loss is worse than not taking a case.
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,407
    I'm a little surprised Alito didn't join in the dissent. I think everyone on the court is unsure how a new gun case would go. From the Libs perspective, Roberts & Kennedy have twice supported gun rights, so I doubt the Libs want to give them a chance to make it 3. From the pro-2A side, Roberts & Kennedy have been wishy-washy and sided with the Libs on non-2A cases that should have been conservative wins. For right now, it seems like neither side wants to take another gun case unless they can be certain they have 5 votes for a win. At this level, a loss is worse than not taking a case.

    I agree, neither side wants to take a new 2A case. For example, they denied cert on the SG's petition in Binderup where the government was pushing an argument that the liberals would love.
     

    GlocksAndPatriots

    Banned
    BANNED!!!
    Aug 29, 2016
    763
    I agree, neither side wants to take a new 2A case. For example, they denied cert on the SG's petition in Binderup where the government was pushing an argument that the liberals would love.

    That must mean, however, that the conservatives know that one of the Heller 5 is either no longer on their side or never really was to begin with. All I know is that it's time for Kennedy to retire. He's an egomaniacal piece of garbage on virtually every important issue imaginable.
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    I agree, neither side wants to take a new 2A case. For example, they denied cert on the SG's petition in Binderup where the government was pushing an argument that the liberals would love.

    Which makes sense that Ginsburg and Sotomayor voted to hear the case.
     

    jcutonilli

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 28, 2013
    2,474
    My guess is because Thomas and Gorsuch are more principled. They don't want the court playing games. If granting cert means that bad laws are upheld, that's better than leaving it in limbo. I'm a bit surprised about Alito though. Roberts is a POS, and we all know that. But Alito generally is principled and doesn't care what the left thinks of him.

    SCOTUS is a lot less political than you make them out to be. They are unanimous is 40-50% of the cases to some extent. http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/SB_unanimity_20170621.pdf This term they were 70% unanimous.

    The 5-4 decisions average about 20% of the cases (5-7% the last two terms) http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/SB_5-4cases_20170621.pdf While about 70% of these cases have an ideological split, with Kennedy the deciding factor, 30% of these cases are not decided that way. These 30% have a variety of alignments.

    The problem with deciding cases is that they tend to stay around a long time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_overruled_United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions I have not calculated a specific average, but most are in the decades or longer. It is extremely rare for a time period shorter than a decade.

    One issue with waiting are the small number of states (less than 10) that impose severe restrictions. These other states are unlikely to create laws that impinge on the 2A. Most other issues have conflicts on both sides of the issue. When you get in the habit of waiting it becomes difficult to get out of that habit.

    I think the reason SCOTUS has not taken another case has to do with the similarity of the arguments to date and the lack of any challenge to the historical precedents with respect to CCW.
     

    MDFF2008

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 12, 2008
    24,735
    I still don't understand how they did not get 4 votes for cert. Obviously Thomas and Gorsuch voted for it. Where were Roberts and Alito? Where were the liberal justices? I would assume they would vote for cert so they could uphold the 9ths ruling. And if, as some suggest, there is some magical agreement to reject cert until conservatives are certain they can win the case (which I think is wishful thinking) then why did Thomas and Gorsuch dissent?

    They may have 4 votes for cert, they may not be sure of the 5th vote to win.

    It doesn't make sense to bring up a case if you aren't reasonably sure your side will win.

    On the flip side, it sounds like the anti-2a side isn't confident of a win either.
     

    Kharn

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 9, 2008
    3,578
    Hazzard County
    They may have 4 votes for cert, they may not be sure of the 5th vote to win.

    It doesn't make sense to bring up a case if you aren't reasonably sure your side will win.

    On the flip side, it sounds like the anti-2a side isn't confident of a win either.

    Problem for the left is if one dies in their sleep or Kennedy decides it's time to retire, Trump gets to replace him/her and it becomes a sure win. From cert to June is a long time.
     

    MDFF2008

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 12, 2008
    24,735
    Problem for the left is if one dies in their sleep or Kennedy decides it's time to retire, Trump gets to replace him/her and it becomes a sure win. From cert to June is a long time.

    But if it doesn't happen.

    My feeling is that the pro-2a justices don't want to be responsible for a bad ruling, and the anti-2a justices don't want to be responsible for expanding 2A.
     

    Inigoes

    Head'n for the hills
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 21, 2008
    49,353
    SoMD / West PA
    But if it doesn't happen.

    My feeling is that the pro-2a justices don't want to be responsible for a bad ruling, and the anti-2a justices don't want to be responsible for expanding 2A.


    It's only a matter of time !!!

    RGB is 84, Kennedy is 80, and Bryer is 78

    The odds are getting better with each passing day
     

    jbrown50

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 18, 2014
    3,471
    DC
    They may have 4 votes for cert, they may not be sure of the 5th vote to win.

    It doesn't make sense to bring up a case if you aren't reasonably sure your side will win.

    On the flip side, it sounds like the anti-2a side isn't confident of a win either.

    That's my take on it too. Neither side can be sure of how Kennedy will vote so why risk a loss.

    We knew we needed to get more conservative/pro 2A justices on the court so this shouldn't be a surprise to most of us.

    Imagine the state of affairs if Clinton had won.:sad20:
     

    Bob A

    όυ φροντισ
    MDS Supporter
    Patriot Picket
    Nov 11, 2009
    30,687
    SCOTUS is a lot less political than you make them out to be.

    Insofar as Progressivism is the religion of the Left, I suppose that your statement is true. It's not a political decision when you're making decisions on your personal faith, rather than the law.
     

    jcutonilli

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 28, 2013
    2,474
    Insofar as Progressivism is the religion of the Left, I suppose that your statement is true. It's not a political decision when you're making decisions on your personal faith, rather than the law.

    Your argument is not supported by facts. This term SCOTUS voted unanimously in the vast majority of the cases (according to Scotusblog). Is Thomas too far to the left for you because all of the other justices voted the same way he did for those cases.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,915
    Messages
    7,258,433
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom