Post-McDonald Second Amendment Cases

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!
  • Gray Peterson

    Active Member
    Aug 18, 2009
    422
    Lynnwood, WA
    Maloney v. Spitzer (Rice):

    2:03-cv-00786-ADS-MLO

    US District Court for the Eastern District of New York (NYED). You can do your PACER magic to the documents post-McDonald that would be greatly appreciated. I am watching this case with interest.
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    Maloney v. Spitzer (Rice):

    2:03-cv-00786-ADS-MLO

    US District Court for the Eastern District of New York (NYED). You can do your PACER magic to the documents post-McDonald that would be greatly appreciated. I am watching this case with interest.

    2:03-cv-786 is showing "CLOSED 01/17/2007" on PACER for NYED. I'm guessing that is when it then went to the 2nd Circuit.

    Many of us know what happened while at the 2nd Ckt (Sotomayor sitting). (See HERE for the Maloney v Cuomo decision which included her while at the 2nd Ckt)

    Maloney v. Rice (nee Spitzer, nee Cuomo) then had 15 seconds of fame at the SCOTUS, the day following the McDonald decision.

    http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/062910zr.pdf
    08-1592
    MALONEY, JAMES M. V. RICE, KATHLEEN A.
    The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit for further consideration in light of McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. ___ (2010). Justice Sotomayor took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

    Justice Sotomayor properly recused herself from the decision to send it to the 2nd Circuit for further post-McDonald consideration, not back to the NY Eastern District.

    From there, the trail gets real cold...I find nothing filed in the 2nd Circuit under Maloney for this year. There is a lot of stuff out there on the 07-0581 appearance at the 2nd Ckt, nothing I can find subsequent to that...

    I'll add it to the OP but something is amiss on this one following the June SCOTUS appearance...
     

    Patrick

    MSI Executive Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    7,725
    Calvert County
    Maloney v. Spitzer (Rice):

    2:03-cv-00786-ADS-MLO

    US District Court for the Eastern District of New York (NYED). You can do your PACER magic to the documents post-McDonald that would be greatly appreciated. I am watching this case with interest.

    Me, too. I'm curious to see how non-firearm "arms" are handled post-McDonald. They might just go with a real narrow ruling specifically on nunchucks (sp?) and avoid the larger issue of knives and the like.

    I'm not as clued in on non-firearm 2A cases. Sounds like you are. Thoughts?
     

    Gray Peterson

    Active Member
    Aug 18, 2009
    422
    Lynnwood, WA
    2:03-cv-786 is showing "CLOSED 01/17/2007" on PACER for NYED. I'm guessing that is when it then went to the 2nd Circuit.

    Many of us know what happened while at the 2nd Ckt (Sotomayor sitting). (See HERE for the Maloney v Cuomo decision which included her while at the 2nd Ckt)

    Maloney v. Rice (nee Spitzer, nee Cuomo) then had 15 seconds of fame at the SCOTUS, the day following the McDonald decision.

    http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/062910zr.pdf


    Justice Sotomayor properly recused herself from the decision to send it to the 2nd Circuit for further post-McDonald consideration, not back to the NY Eastern District.

    From there, the trail gets real cold...I find nothing filed in the 2nd Circuit under Maloney for this year. There is a lot of stuff out there on the 07-0581 appearance at the 2nd Ckt, nothing I can find subsequent to that...

    I'll add it to the OP but something is amiss on this one following the June SCOTUS appearance...

    Don't worry about the "close" date. If you look at the Docket in PACER you will see filings post McDonald. Second Circuit, early last month, reverse and remanded the case to district court. Right now, Maloney has been a request to file a Second Amended Complaint. Once that is approved, the "close date" goes away and it starts anew.
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    Me, too. I'm curious to see how non-firearm "arms" are handled post-McDonald. They might just go with a real narrow ruling specifically on nunchucks (sp?) and avoid the larger issue of knives and the like.

    I'm not as clued in on non-firearm 2A cases. Sounds like you are. Thoughts?

    There are a few non-firearms cases out there besides Maloney...mainly dealing with the problems out in CA and some of the BS laws being put out lately (retaliatory?) such as the mail-order ammo ban. I too feel these cases as important and will certainly add them into the OP as I get the info...

    I love these cases, all of them. I'll be sporting a new sig shortly regarding the anti's Amicus for McDonald where their doom and gloom of a glut of cases being imminent as a result, have finally come to fruition...
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    Don't worry about the "close" date. If you look at the Docket in PACER you will see filings post McDonald. Second Circuit, early last month, reverse and remanded the case to district court. Right now, Maloney has been a request to file a Second Amended Complaint. Once that is approved, the "close date" goes away and it starts anew.

    Wilco....as time permits...
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    More cases:

    OOIDA v. Lindley, State Ammunition v. Lindley. Not specifically 2A cases but gun related.

    Dearth v. Holder, US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, striking down residency restrictions for buying handguns under the Gun Control Act of 1968.

    Added/Updated State Ammunition v. Lindley. (CA Ban on non-FTF Ammo Sales, mail order ammo ban)
    http://ia360707.us.archive.org/15/i...d.210620/gov.uscourts.caed.210620.docket.html

    CA filed a Motion to Dismiss yesterday, to go with the one from Woollard v. Sheridan...big day for MTD's. This one is huge in my book and may warrant it's own thread.

    Back to my cave...
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    Don't worry about the "close" date. If you look at the Docket in PACER you will see filings post McDonald. Second Circuit, early last month, reverse and remanded the case to district court. Right now, Maloney has been a request to file a Second Amended Complaint. Once that is approved, the "close date" goes away and it starts anew.

    Further digging yielded results...it's in the OP right now as Maloney v Spitzer. There has been a LOT of activity by Mr. Maloney the last week. I'm not going to download all the new documents...

    Revised/Updated Docket: http://ia360703.us.archive.org/2/items/gov.uscourts.nyed.14974/gov.uscourts.nyed.14974.docket.html
    This may take an hour or so to reflect the new uploads...

    This may warrant it's own thread as well...
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    23) GeorgiaCarry.Org, Inc., et al v. Pinkie Toomer (Church Carry Case) First complaint was in state, but it was removed to federal court.
    11th Circuit in Georgia.
    http://georgiacarry.com/state/places_of_worship/

    No, It's GeorgiaCarry.org v. State of Georgia. the Toomer case is a non-resident CHL case. The GCO v. State case is still in district court.

    Fixed and thanks! Had similar issues with 2 D'Cruz cases! Busy, busy time...
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    Jackson et al v. City and County of San Francisco et al (CA Non-sporting ammo ban, trigger locks, firing in city)
    Internet Archive: http://ia311016.us.archive.org/0/items/gov.uscourts.cand.215014/gov.uscourts.cand.215014.docket.html

    Since there isn't a thread on this one, quick update...this has a lot of the earmarks of DC and Chicago kind of restrictions. With Heller and McDonald in our pockets, this should be an easy one. Famous last words...

    This one had been on an indefinite stay....awaiting McDonald, awaiting Nordyke which was awaiting McDonald, etc....

    Story is here: http://www.calgunlaws.com/index.php...o-and-self-defense-bans-in-san-francisco.html
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    A whole bunch of Internet Archive links from the OP have changed, making accessing the various Dockets impossible for now. I have no idea what happened and why they changed, but they can't hide for long....

    I also got a Date with my Wife this evening, so these updates will have to take a back seat to this...hope you all understand.

    The ones affected are:
    • Benson
    • Kachalsky
    • Woollard
    • Bateman
    • D'Cruz (both)
    • Mishaga
    • State Ammunition
    • Georgia Carry v. Toomer

    I'll fix a few before Date-night, the rest will be tomorrow.
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    Links have been fixed for the Internet Archive dockets.

    Major "makeover" for the Original Post, I sorted by the scope of the case and cleaned things up.

    Added the date of filing and the Court that the cases are currently in.

    Cases that are at the Circuit Court of Appeals can not be updated with RECAP to the Internet Archive I found out. RECAP only works for District Courts. The pdf's can still be had, but they will have to be embedded in the appropriate threads.
     

    Patrick

    MSI Executive Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    7,725
    Calvert County
    I don't think many here recognize just how much work it is to keep track of all these cases. And you do it with aplomb.

    Seriously: dinner and drinks on me next time we get together. Thanks again.
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    The Brady's were Right...

    Fair is fair...the Brady Campaign was actually right (it took a while) and I am going to swallow my pride on this one and give them credit where credit is due....

    In their Amicus Brief for McDonald this Spring, on Pg 21 of 52 they properly stated:
    Courts already have been grappling with over 190 Second Amendment challenges brought against firearms laws and prosecutions in the year and a half since District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S. Ct. 2783 (2008).
    Among those are challenges to statutes barring the carrying of loaded guns on public streets,2 (Palmer) the possession and sale of guns on designated government property, 3 (Nordyke) the sale of particularly dangerous firearms,4 (Pena v Cid) and the possession of firearms by indicted individuals.5 (Blah...)
    If this Court holds that the Second Amendment is incorporated, state and federal courts undoubtedly will be further inundated with challenges to gun laws. Absent this Court's guidance on the standard of review applicable
    to such cases, these challenges will lead to inconsistent outcomes and uncertainty in the legal system.6

    :thumbsup:
     

    Norton

    NRA Endowment Member, Rifleman
    Staff member
    Admin
    Moderator
    May 22, 2005
    122,856

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,924
    Messages
    7,259,276
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom