Wrenn PI Granted (DC Shall Issue)

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!
  • press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    They are actually trying to make the case that public carry of arms was unusual and banned in many places at the founding. That and we're special.

    Surprisingly they aren't using Peruta other than the English law references. That tells me they are not going to try to play the open/concealed carry distinction.
     

    fightinbluhen51

    "Quack Pot Call Honker"
    Oct 31, 2008
    8,974
    They are actually trying to make the case that public carry of arms was unusual and banned in many places at the founding. That and we're special.

    Surprisingly they aren't using Peruta other than the English law references. That tells me they are not going to try to play the open/concealed carry distinction.

    Currently, that distinction only exists in the CA9. Why give SCOTUS a true split?
     

    wolfwood

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 24, 2011
    1,361
    Reply Brief of Appellants (Gura). A pleasure to read.

    Great brief but that Everytown brief is really convincing. I really wish the NRA would pony up some money and hire real historians to conduct research on Common Law Englands weapons carry laws. That is the only way to beat Everytown's historical analysis which is wrong but really carefully written to appear right.
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    Great brief but that Everytown brief is really convincing. I really wish the NRA would pony up some money and hire real historians to conduct research on Common Law Englands weapons carry laws. That is the only way to beat Everytown's historical analysis which is wrong but really carefully written to appear right.

    Wouldn't Halbrook be the go to guy?
     

    wolfwood

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 24, 2011
    1,361
    Wouldn't Halbrook be the go to guy?

    Halbrook is a great authority on colonial America but not on 1300-1600 England. I am talking about actual historians with Phd and do history for a living rather than lawyers dabbling at history.
     

    wjackcooper

    Active Member
    Feb 9, 2011
    689
    From Mr. Gura’s reply brief at page 28:

    “Plaintiffs renew their offer to save everyone a great deal of time (were that goal universally desired) by stipulating, for the sake of argument, that their victory would prove a public policy disaster, with widespread chaos and mayhem overtaking today’s bucolic order.”

    Absolutely brilliant, no judge worthy of being addressed as “Your Honor” could read this and keep a straight face.

    Regards
    Jack
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    We should know the panel in a few days. It's also worth noting Merrick Garland is recusing himself from all cases while his SCOTUS status is in limbo.
    From my count that leaves 9 GOP appointees to 7 Dems if you include Senior Status judges. I would certainly note Henderson was appointed by Bush 41 but votes against us all the time while Obama appointed Millett voted with us in Heller 3.
     

    Master_P

    Member
    May 27, 2015
    77
    Looks like Grace is going to be argued on the same day, probably before the same panel.

    Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    Panel will be Henderson (UGHHH), Griffith, and Williams. Griffith is good, don't know much about Williams other than he's a senior status judge appointed by Reagan which means we have a shot.
     

    wolfwood

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 24, 2011
    1,361
    Panel will be Henderson (UGHHH), Griffith, and Williams. Griffith is good, don't know much about Williams other than he's a senior status judge appointed by Reagan which means we have a shot.

    How does Henderson get on so many panels? That is not statistically possible if this is truly random assignment.
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,407
    Panel will be Henderson (UGHHH), Griffith, and Williams. Griffith is good, don't know much about Williams other than he's a senior status judge appointed by Reagan which means we have a shot.

    I've been before Williams lots of times. A tough, very smart, no nonsense judge. He hasn't lost a step since assuming senior status.
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    How does Henderson get on so many panels? That is not statistically possible if this is truly random assignment.

    I'm not sure that the panels are 100 percent random. If you look at the calendar you'll see a judge who will hear a number of cases close together. I think the judges may be on some kind of rotation which keeps their workloads similiar. A true 100 percent random panel each time may yield some judges getting more than others.

    But it's still a wonder how she's ended up on every single 2A case except Heller 3. I'd have to do some digging but I don't recall other DC Circuit judges ever hearing more than maybe 1 or 2 2A cases. The circuit chief to my knowledge hasn't heard any yet.
     

    wolfwood

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 24, 2011
    1,361
    I'm not sure that the panels are 100 percent random. If you look at the calendar you'll see a judge who will hear a number of cases close together. I think the judges may be on some kind of rotation which keeps their workloads similiar. A true 100 percent random panel each time may yield some judges getting more than others.

    But it's still a wonder how she's ended up on every single 2A case except Heller 3. I'd have to do some digging but I don't recall other DC Circuit judges ever hearing more than maybe 1 or 2 2A cases. The circuit chief to my knowledge hasn't heard any yet.

    I know you are right about the workload being kept similar. At least in the Ninth the cases are weighted for difficulty. Then given a value. So a really easy case gets a 1 and a case like Peruta gets a 3 (I am just making up these values) then the values are added together. That is done obviously so a judge does not get 10 really hard cases and another judge gets 10 easy cases.
    beyond that it is supposed to random.....

    Maybe esq can answer on this.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,920
    Messages
    7,258,945
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom