Kisor v. Wilkie
- Thread starter Inigoes
- 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:
ATF?
It's a very big deal. So-called Chevron and Auer deference, the concepts that the Government is assumed to be the subject matter expert and courts should defer by default to agency judgement on facts and policies. It sets up a very high hurdle for someone trying to challenge an administrative decision, like reclassifying bumpstocks as NFA items, in court because the GOV is presumed to be right even before you get a chance to present your case.
Exactly.
The GCA'68 defined a machinegun in law.
Circa 2018, the BATFE redefines a machinegun to include a bumpstock by regulation, not supported by law.
Elliotte
Ultimate Member
The precedent being challenged requires courts to accept an agency's definition of an unclear regulation rather than deciding if that regulation fits. In our case the ATF definitions of pistols, automatic weapons, etc. Or on a Maryland example, what's a "designated collector"? We know what it's been interpreted to mean, but it's not spelled out in the laws anywhere.
Fair enough, missed that connection.
krucam
Ultimate Member
These Court referenced 'Deferences' in .gov agencies often goes too far. Long standing policies, etc...it is essentially their saying "Let it Be"...it would be good to have these Deferences to .gov be 'reexamined'
2nd=Good+Substantial
Ultimate Member
How would overturning "defer[ing] to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of its own ambiguous regulation" apply to MSP's interpretation of "good and substantial"? If successful, could this federal decision be used to argue against MSP capriciously saying "we know it when we see it"?
It primarily affects court challenges to Federal regulatory actions. I don't know if it would have any effect on actions in state courtrooms.
After yesterday's Timbs v. Indiana, it does.
GunBum
Active Member
I was at a meeting with some other Lawyers from the law firm representing these cases on Tuesday. I was there for something different, but these cases have an impact on the case law for the case my employer hired them for. That’s all I can say. Don’t ask. 
The Lawyers were giddy over how much of a slam dunk these cases are going to be. I’ve never seen a group of Lawyers so happy about a case, let alone a SCOTUS case.
Supposedly they also have some pro 2A cases lined up waiting on the rulings. They are waiting for dominoes to drop...
The Lawyers were giddy over how much of a slam dunk these cases are going to be. I’ve never seen a group of Lawyers so happy about a case, let alone a SCOTUS case.
Supposedly they also have some pro 2A cases lined up waiting on the rulings. They are waiting for dominoes to drop...
I was at a meeting with some other Lawyers from the law firm representing these cases on Tuesday. I was there for something different, but these cases have an impact on the case law for the case my employer hired them for. That’s all I can say. Don’t ask.
The Lawyers were giddy over how much of a slam dunk these cases are going to be. I’ve never seen a group of Lawyers so happy about a case, let alone a SCOTUS case.
Supposedly they also have some pro 2A cases lined up waiting on the rulings. They are waiting for dominoes to drop...
I’m happy to hear that!!
Biggfoot44
Ultimate Member
- Aug 2, 2009
- 33,170
Likewise my first thought was Good & Substantial
The VA is getting sued left and right.
Another SCOTUS case being heard this session (today as a matter of fact), that may have an impact on being able to overturn the bump stock ban at the federal level.
17-1679 GRAY V. WILKIE
Another SCOTUS case being heard this session (today as a matter of fact), that may have an impact on being able to overturn the bump stock ban at the federal level.
17-1679 GRAY V. WILKIE
Elliotte
Ultimate Member
I wonder if this could have any impact on the reclassification of bump stocks as machine gun parts? Assuming the ruling goes the way we want
The case is being argued today
xKtF
Member
- Nov 5, 2018
- 69
Thanks for the updates and posting so I can get notifications
Transcript is now publicly available
https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2018/18-15_3314.pdf
https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2018/18-15_3314.pdf
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
Clearance Liqui Moly Motorbike 4T SAE 15W-50 Street | Full Synthetic Motor Oil | 4 Liter (5 Viewers)- Started by mpollan1
- Replies: 3
-
-
-
-
-
-