Young Opening Brief Filed

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!
  • motorcoachdoug

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    That would show outright hostitily if we happened to get a good en banc panel, win, and then the 9th calls for ALL 29 judges to sit for another round of orals.

    Think about it,9CA in the past has been totally hostile against SCOTUS before and was really unhappy having to be smacked down again. Isn't their a rule that if HI loses at the En Banc Hearing that the 9th can not call for a En Banc again requiring all 29 judges to hear the case again? I know where i will be on the 25th of March since 9CA does a live broadcast...
     

    delaware_export

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 10, 2018
    3,144
    Hawaii is MAY BUT WONT ISSUE. For both open and concealed carry.

    That seems like a total ban.

    The voter, errr citizens, have been suppressed and stopped applying for concealed carry, because the answer is DENIED before application. (Rumor has it that the form has DENIED pre printed :sarcasm: )

    And with open carry requiring permission, and denied for everyone except people employed in the security business, that is effectively a total ban for regular citizens.

    Maybe, much like the ny premise case, this one is a big enough infringement to pull in 5 or more.

    We are definitely paying for the heavy use of “IN THE HOME” phrasing from the Heller case. As a non lawyer, I try to understand why it featured so heavy in the ruling. I think I get it, but it does seem to be Scalia’s gift that keeps coming back. And what a2a judges solely focus on.

    Setting an alarm for March 25! I gotta watch these arguments live!
     
    Last edited:

    Allen65

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 29, 2013
    7,063
    Anne Arundel County
    We are definitely paying for the heavy use of “IN THE HOME” phrasing from the Heller case. As a non lawyer, I try to understand why it featured so heavy in the ruling. I think I get it, but it does seem to be Scalia’s gift that keeps coming back. And what a2a judges solely focus on.

    That language may have been necessary for Scalia to get a majority onboard with the decision. At the time, declaring that 2A was an individual right was a huge step as it was.

    Just like the antis trying to do in the opposite direction, we need to work incrementally restoring the BoR.
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    With the speed this is moving, I'm getting the hunch that CA9 may simply say the law has been changed thanks to the AG opinion and that this should be sent back to the district court, thus bypassing any stand on the 2A question.
    IANAL so perhaps Esq or someone else can say whether that's a possibility
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    With the speed this is moving, I'm getting the hunch that CA9 may simply say the law has been changed thanks to the AG opinion and that this should be sent back to the district court, thus bypassing any stand on the 2A question.
    IANAL so perhaps Esq or someone else can say whether that's a possibility

    Nah, they have every intention of overturning the Panel ruling...there would have to be some impressive legal juggling given the Peruta ruling which has painted them into a corner...
     

    Inigoes

    Head'n for the hills
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 21, 2008
    49,366
    SoMD / West PA
    Nah, they have every intention of overturning the Panel ruling...there would have to be some impressive legal juggling given the Peruta ruling which has painted them into a corner...

    They would have to be very creative to erase the word "bear" from the second amendment.

    The 9CA already said there is no right to concealed carry following Peruta.

    So what part of "bear" is left in "keep and bear arms"?
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    Nah, they have every intention of overturning the Panel ruling...there would have to be some impressive legal juggling given the Peruta ruling which has painted them into a corner...

    But the district court route avoids Scotus. The other routes either have them ruling the right is home bound or that the right is satisfied through a may issue scheme which has never issued a permit.
    We'll see
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    But the district court route avoids Scotus. The other routes either have them ruling the right is home bound or that the right is satisfied through a may issue scheme which has never issued a permit.
    We'll see

    Understood but the reality will be that IF Rogers is granted, Young will be stayed. That said, SCOTUS in considering Rogers will know about Young, at CA9.
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    Young is being Stayed (in en banc) until the Opinion in NYSRPA v New York is released...

    https://twitter.com/gunpolicy/status/1096138170297544705

    DzZD2jAVsAAr8Qk.jpg:large
     

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,239
    Montgomery County
    Young is being Stayed (in en banc) until the Opinion in NYSRPA v New York is released...

    https://twitter.com/gunpolicy/status/1096138170297544705

    DzZD2jAVsAAr8Qk.jpg:large

    So that means no action on it for something like a year, right? The NY case won't be heard until this fall, if I remember, and then we wouldn't see a ruling until sometime in the first half of 2020? And THEN this circuit will see about setting a schedule for hearing this? That would add months more, at least. Lovely.
     

    Fedora

    Active Member
    Dec 16, 2018
    125
    So that means no action on it for something like a year, right? The NY case won't be heard until this fall, if I remember, and then we wouldn't see a ruling until sometime in the first half of 2020? And THEN this circuit will see about setting a schedule for hearing this? That would add months more, at least. Lovely.

    Not a lawyer, but game theory would suggest that (a) at a certain point, the panel decision would pass the "appeals" window, (b) CA9 took it en banc to stop this from happening, and (c) in June, 2020, SCOTUS's decision on the NY case will probably moot "Young".

    Once again, IANAL, but I don't see this as a step backwards for the California fellows.
     

    danb

    dont be a dumbass
    Feb 24, 2013
    22,704
    google is your friend, I am not.
    The panel opinion is no longer precedent but its too late to unring the bell. Its out there, people will read it even if they do not cite it.

    SCOTUS's decision on the NY case will not moot Young. However to the extent that the Supreme Court defines the scope of "bear" arms, 9th will have to use it.
     

    Blacksmith101

    Grumpy Old Man
    Jun 22, 2012
    22,163
    Justice delayed is Justice denied. The case could be much closer to a final decision if it was allowed to proceed.

    I think the 9th circus is really worried about SCOTUS taking the case and is afraid that all the unconstitutional lower court decisions are about to get their Pee Pee's whacked.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,935
    Messages
    7,259,606
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom