Brooklyn
I stand with John Locke.
Maybe the disent will give them a clue...
Maybe not..
Maybe not..
Freidman v. Highland Park (AWB)
- Thread starter press1280
- Start date
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:
Kharn
Ultimate Member
I wouldn't be surprised if we had to wait for a law to be struck down by the appeals court before the Supremes examine an AWB. Problem is how few states with such proclivities are in pro-gun circuits.
Maybe with luck, none of these will go to SCOTUS until President Trump can make an appointment to Ginsberg's seat.....
I mean, there is some hope I suppose from the 2nd, since they went against the 7 round limit.
I'm not sure that would be a factor for a split, since the laws in Kolbe and Friedman didn't go below the 10 round limit. Hopefully I'm wrong.
pilotguy
Ultimate Member
Kolbe is guaranteed to be dead in the water if it reaches SCOTUS.
It WILL reach them. But if Kolbe loses I agree it's dead in the water.
pilotguy
Ultimate Member
I believe the only way to get a case in front of SCOTUS is to challenge a non-restrictive law like one that would specifically allow semi auto rifles or the like. But then I think there are enough justices who would strike that down to make it a dangerous journey.
danb
dont be a dumbass
The concern I have with the last two dissents is that it only got two people signed on. That means Alito was not on board with granting cert.
jamesriver
Member
Not necessarily...only Thomas and Alito dissented from the SCOTUS initial decision last fall to not hear the gay marriage cases (then they basically had to once there was disagreement among appeals courts) and that still wound up with Alito and Roberts siding with them in the end, 5-4.
danb
dont be a dumbass
If you always predict "denied" you will be right 95%+ of the time. The court does not say why it denied, so any reason I give cannot be proven wrong.
If you predict an opinion will be unanimous, you will be right 70% of the time too.
Brooklyn
I stand with John Locke.
Constitutional Convention.
If you think the courts are done..
Start now.
I Don't think there done..
So I wait.
danb
dont be a dumbass
Which is why I go back to the fact that only two signed on to the dissent. Bizarre reasoning alone is not enough for cert. There must be something else that steered them away. Could be a lack of split, or a lot of other things.
kcbrown
Super Genius
- Jun 16, 2012
- 1,393
Then why do you believe they're not done, when the evidence thus far quite clearly says otherwise?
kcbrown
Super Genius
- Jun 16, 2012
- 1,393
The court has had a decent variety of fundamental 2A cases sent up to it. It has denied cert to all of them. None of the variety of factors present in those cases made any difference. Existence of a split, nature of the question, narrowness of the issue, nature of the plaintiff, etc. Nothing.
When you tweak all the variables and always come up empty, then it either means that the selection process is random (disproved by the fact that both Heller and McDonald were granted cert in relatively quick succession), or it means that the reason for denial is independent of any factors in the cases being sent up.
But if the latter is true, then it follows that no case we send up will be granted cert until whatever condition that is preventing cert from being granted changes. I've already posited a reason for the change of behavior of the Court (and yes, it is a change. No other fundamental right has ever been utterly ignored by the Court after initial recognition, such that the end result is the same as if the initial recognition hadn't happened in the first place, the way this one is being ignored), while others are possible, one thing cannot reasonably be denied at this point: 2nd Amendment cases are now being treated differently from other fundamental rights cases by the Court.
As for your claim that all of our cases have been denied cert because the Court denies cert to most cases, the actual probabilities involved once one gets past the first conference belie that claim. Most of the cases we've sent up (well, the ones we have been discussing on this forum, at least) have made it past the first conference. Some, like this one, went way past that. But regardless, the vast majority of denials happen during the first conference, and that has not been true of our cases. And yet, every single one of our cases has been denied cert anyway. At first glance, that flies in the face of the probabilities. Cases that are rescheduled during the first conference have a 58.5% chance that they will eventually be granted cert. And yet, we have had NONE granted. So no, it is quite clear that this cannot be explained through the normal workings of the Court.
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
-
What would be the best Maryland compliant rifle I can buy for under $3000? (17 Viewers)
- Latest: Tool
-
-
-
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
What would be the best Maryland compliant rifle I can buy for under $3000? (17 Viewers)
- Started by Tool
- Replies: 7
-
-
-
-
-
