Hatfield V Sessions Question

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!
  • liberty

    Member
    Jun 11, 2018
    4
    Tried emailing court clerks of judge Gilbert and chicago fbi community relations dept.but am being ignored. Can someone answer my questions, does the ruling apply to all those convicted of non-violent felonies or is the ruling going to be done on a case by case basis for hundreds of thousands or millions of Americans in this category? Did the judge order the fbi to remove names of non-violent felons from the NICS system? If not how can felons convicted of non violent offenses buy a firearm? Did Hatfield have an attorney if so whats his/her name or did he argue pro se? Will this ruling affect the Michaels V Lynch case/
     

    danb

    dont be a dumbass
    Feb 24, 2013
    22,704
    google is your friend, I am not.
    it is a good opinion, but IIRC this is only a district court opinion right now, not an appeals court opinion, and has no precedential value. Meaning, "case by case" until an appeals court affirms the opinion. And even then, it would only be for people in 7th circuit. Right now, no effect on any other case, and there would be no NICS implications until the appeals court weighs in. And there would be no national implication until the Supreme Court weighs in.


    https://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=223220
     

    wolfwood

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 24, 2011
    1,361
    Tried emailing court clerks of judge Gilbert and chicago fbi community relations dept.but am being ignored. Can someone answer my questions, does the ruling apply to all those convicted of non-violent felonies or is the ruling going to be done on a case by case basis for hundreds of thousands or millions of Americans in this category? Did the judge order the fbi to remove names of non-violent felons from the NICS system? If not how can felons convicted of non violent offenses buy a firearm? Did Hatfield have an attorney if so whats his/her name or did he argue pro se? Will this ruling affect the Michaels V Lynch case/

    it is case by case

    Even if the guy wins at the 7th Circuit it will still be case by case because he made an as applied challenge.

    A facial challenge is the type that impacts everybody and takes out the law but those have been tried and failed.

    Actually a facial challenge that wins at the district court level enjoins the law for everyone because it enjoins whatever government entity who's law is at stake from enforcing it.

    That said if we win enough of these the FBI will have to start conducting right restoration again
     
    Last edited:

    liberty

    Member
    Jun 11, 2018
    4
    according to the court clerk NO APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED. I am under the impression the govt had 30 days to file an appeal. if I am correct does the judge's decision have the effect of law?
     

    wolfwood

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 24, 2011
    1,361
    according to the court clerk NO APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED. I am under the impression the govt had 30 days to file an appeal. if I am correct does the judge's decision have the effect of law?

    the federal government gets 60 days to appeal
    Rule 4. Appeal as of Right—When Taken
    (a) Appeal in a Civil Case.

    (1) Time for Filing a Notice of Appeal.

    (A) In a civil case, except as provided in Rules 4(a)(1)(B), 4(a)(4), and 4(c), the notice of appeal required by Rule 3 must be filed with the district clerk within 30 days after entry of the judgment or order appealed from.

    (B) The notice of appeal may be filed by any party within 60 days after entry of the judgment or order appealed from if one of the parties is:

    (i) the United States;

    (ii) a United States agency;

    (iii) a United States officer or employee sued in an official capacity; or

    (iv) a current or former United States officer or employee sued in an individual capacity for an act or omission occurring in connection with duties performed on the United States' behalf — including all instances in which the United States represents that person when the judgment or order is entered or files the appeal for that person.
     

    Inigoes

    Head'n for the hills
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 21, 2008
    49,365
    SoMD / West PA
    Will this ruling affect the Michaels V Lynch case/

    Yep

    The U.S. Supreme Court turned down a gun-rights case Monday that more subtly challenged the legitimacy of Acting U.S. Attorney General Matt Whitaker’s appointment by President Donald Trump.

    In the underlying case, former Nevada Senate contender Barry Michaels brought a suit to add a self-defense exception to the federal law barring convicted felons from firearm ownership.

    The suit named the U.S. attorney general as defendant, however, a role that since November has been filled by former Justice Department Chief of Staff Whitaker.

    Represented by the firm Goldstein & Russell, Michaels claimed that Whitaker’s appointment caused a constitutional crisis that would not allow for the court to properly address matters at hand. Michaels suggested Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein be named in Whitaker’s place instead.

    The onetime political hopeful has for years been a small-business owner but is barred from gun ownership due to nonviolent federal convictions including mail and securities fraud.

    https://www.courthousenews.com/supreme-court-nixes-challenge-to-acting-ag-whitaker/


    18-496 MICHAELS, BARRY V. WHITAKER, ACTING ATT'Y GEN.
    The motion of petitioner to substitute is denied. The
    petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/011419zor_8nk0.pdf

    Issues: In determining whether a felon is entitled to lodge an as-applied challenge to the constitutionality of a felon disarmament law such as 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(1), (1) what does the phrase “law-abiding, responsible citizens” in District of Columbia v. Heller mean; and (2) what does it mean that “longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons” are “presumptively lawful regulatory measures” under Heller.

    https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/michaels-v-whitaker/
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,930
    Messages
    7,259,487
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom