Woollard Expectations are High

hvymax · Jul 17, 2013

GTOGUNNER said:
In Williams, IIRC, Gansler et al, wrote in their opposition for cert something to the effect that their were better cases in the pipe than Williams and the court should wait for one of those cases. One can only hope. I'll see if I can find the language they used.

There are much better cases from Gansler's point of view. Those will be the ones that get cert.

MDFF2008 · Jul 17, 2013

RightNYer said:
I'm probably the only lawyer who feels this way, but I actually want the Supreme Court to rule that there is no right to carry, and for the federal government to ban it on a federal level. I then want the federal government to attempt to enforce it in conservative states and be met by SWAT teams from that state's police and militia.

I think a full scale Constitutional crisis is long overdue, and the sooner we get it (and a peaceable dissolution of the union) the better.

That's funny right there. There will no peaceful dissolution. It will be a civil war, just like the last one.

T'Challa · Jul 17, 2013

IMO may issue is an infringement on a right. I understand regulating and limited it for the greater good but the ability to say "no carry for you" is like the Soup Nazi on Seinfeld. The gov't can't serve some and not all. I carry as LEO but I believe in the 2A and the rights of all. We have to figure out a way to neutralize the Bloomberg's of the world who keeps fighting guns on every hand.

fightinbluhen51 · Jul 17, 2013

esqappellate said:
If you will recall, the Court didn't take any 2A case until Heller, where the D.C. Circuit struck down the DC statute and the DC Goverment sought cert (against the advice of many). BTW, we won in Heller. If the court is "waiting" (and I am not convinced that the court does much or any "waiting"), it may be waiting for a similar situation to arise. The hard reality is that the Court often doesn't feel the need to take a case until a statute has been invalidated and the state (or federal) sovereignity has thus been thus derailed. That is why I was ardently hoping that there would be a petition in Moore. It doesn't mean that we will lose if the court does take such a case (again, we won Heller), it just means that they don't feel any real need to act in the area. We all tend to place the 2A on a pedestal, but the Court doesn't necessarily share that sense of importance vis a vis the other issues that come before the Court. Remember, the Court sees thousands and thousands of cert petitions every year. About 1% are granted. Many of those petitions are crap but many are not. We did astonishing well to get two petitions granted and WON in two years time.

Frankly, I never expected to see the result in Heller and McDonald in my lifetime (I'm 63 and been practicing appellate law since 1975). The rise of Shall Issue Laws in so many states is astonishing in so many ways and is a pure delight. It doesn't mean we don't continue to push, it does mean that we have come a long ways, both legally in court decisions and legislatively, maybe not in Maryland, NY and Jersey, but federally and in the vast majority of states. Do you remember when you could not carry in a National Park or National Forest, even with a state permit? I do. Do you remember when CCW permits were as rare as hen's teeth? I do. Do you remember when SYG was the law in hardly any states? I do, and now about 30 states have it. Do you remember the legal situation before the enactment of 18 USC 926A in terms of transporting your firearms across state lines? I do, it could mean arrest and imprisonment, especially in Maryland and the NE. Now you have a federally protected safe haven that no state may infringe. Take a deep breath and count your blessings.

What really sucks is, we had our invalidated statue, and then we ran into a buzzsaw of horrible judges.

esqappellate · Jul 17, 2013

fightinbluhen51 said:
What really sucks is, we had our invalidated statue, and then we ran into a buzzsaw of horrible judges.

Yup. It happens. A fair amount. We need a court of appeals to invalidate the statute -- not just a district court. Hence my disappointment that Moore mooted out and my hope for a favorable result in California.

hvymax · Jul 17, 2013

T'Challa said:
IMO may issue is an infringement on a right. I understand regulating and limited it for the greater good but the ability to say "no carry for you" is like the Soup Nazi on Seinfeld. The gov't can't serve some and not all. I carry as LEO but I believe in the 2A and the rights of all. We have to figure out a way to neutralize the Bloomberg's of the world who keeps fighting guns on every hand.

Treat them and all like them as the Domestic Enemies they truly are.

spacer75 · Jul 17, 2013

RightNYer said:
A civil war is coming. I'd rather it be in 2025 than 2055, when I'm too old to be useful.

Hopefully, by that time, DHS would have used up all their "practice" ammunition. :lol2:

Mark75H · Jul 17, 2013

teratos said:
Do you seriously think there can be a peaceable dissolution to the Union? No government will dissolve itself peaceably. It is completely against their nature. Governments only know how to take, they do not know how to give. Any outcome along the lines you are talking about will be the result of a violent and bloody revolution.

I don't think there is any other possible outcome; the most we can hope for is minimal physical violence

ShoreShooter · Jul 17, 2013

I know no one is old enough to remember it, but there have been a lot of movies about that little event called the Civil War. Everyone lost.

Les Gawlik · Jul 17, 2013

We were broke 17 Thousand Billion Dollars ago. We have made promises totalling a quarter of a Quadrillion Dollars, give or take a few dozen trillion and depending upon who's counting. It just can't end well...

aquaman · Jul 17, 2013

ShoreShooter said:
I know no one is old enough to remember it, but there have been a lot of movies about that little event called the Civil War. Everyone lost.

Not really. Slavery wouldn't have ended until machinery could do the work faster and cheaper. I'd guess by the 1960s/70s

fightinbluhen51 · Jul 18, 2013

esqappellate said:
Yup. It happens. A fair amount. We need a court of appeals to invalidate the statute -- not just a district court. Hence my disappointment that Moore mooted out and my hope for a favorable result in California.

I will assume you have either A) not read the cert petition, or B) are not that excited due to the circumstances of the way the circuits have been handing down decisions.

RightNYer · Jul 18, 2013

To answer everyone's question, I am hopeful that the dissolution of the union into two sovereign states can be peacable. Once the liberals realize we're not going to let the impose their agenda on us, I'm optimistic that they will let us go. If it comes to violence though, so be it.

Les Gawlik · Jul 18, 2013

RightNYer said:
To answer everyone's question, I am hopeful that the dissolution of the union into two sovereign states can be peacable. Once the liberals realize we're not going to let the impose their agenda on us, I'm optimistic that they will let us go. If it comes to violence though, so be it.

I think you might have a former President who agrees with your assessment of the country.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/17/jimmy-carter-america-no-longer-has-a-functioning-democracy/

RightNYer · Jul 18, 2013

Les Gawlik said:
I think you might have a former President who agrees with your assessment of the country.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/17/jimmy-carter-america-no-longer-has-a-functioning-democracy/

I don't see any real parallel between his thoughts and mine.

esqappellate · Jul 18, 2013

fightinbluhen51 said:
I will assume you have either A) not read the cert petition, or B) are not that excited due to the circumstances of the way the circuits have been handing down decisions.

I have indeed read the Woollard cert petition. Carefully, in fact. It is a very good cert petition. But after cert was denied in Kachalsky, I am just not optimistic that cert will be granted in Woollard. It isn't a matter of the way the circuits have been acting. I actually rather expected a lot of resistance from the lower federal courts. It is just that Kachalsky and Woollard are essentially identical in the issues presented as well as the posture in which the issues are posed.

RightNYer · Jul 18, 2013

esqappellate said:
I have indeed read the Woollard cert petition. Carefully, in fact. It is a very good cert petition. But after cert was denied in Kachalsky, I am just not optimistic that cert will be granted in Woollard. It isn't a matter of the way the circuits have been acting. I actually rather expected a lot of resistance from the lower federal courts. It is just that Kachalsky and Woollard are essentially identical in the issues presented as well as the posture in which the issues are posed.

I agree. I don't find the concealed carry/open carry distinction particularly meaningful. But the real issue, as I've stated before, is that if the Supreme Court denies cert, not only are they implicitly approving of "may issue," but they're also approving of basically every gun regulation you can think of. If the standard is deferring to the legislature's weighing of the evidence to further the important interest of reducing crime, there isn't a single regulation that would ever fail.

Les Gawlik · Jul 18, 2013

RightNYer said:
I don't see any real parallel between his thoughts and mine.

He said that he thought the US no longer had a functioning democracy. That is the import I got from your earlier post.

Inigoes · Jul 18, 2013

Hopefuly the SCOTUS will see the circuit split. Eventhough Moore is note quite mooted (almost there, but not yet).

Peaceful John · Jul 18, 2013

esqappellate said:
I have indeed read the Woollard cert petition. Carefully, in fact. It is a very good cert petition. But after cert was denied in Kachalsky, I am just not optimistic that cert will be granted in Woollard. It isn't a matter of the way the circuits have been acting. I actually rather expected a lot of resistance from the lower federal courts. It is just that Kachalsky and Woollard are essentially identical in the issues presented as well as the posture in which the issues are posed.

Essentially identical except for the timing. With Kachalsky there was still hope that Moore might be submitted for cert. That is no longer the case, yet SCOTUS can now take another swing at the Kachalsky argument through Woollard. I am not arguing that cert is assured for Woollard, only that it's not without hope.

In any event, it's only a matter of time. That very useful opinion in CA7 has no "use by" date and it's certain that a clear circuit split will eventually happen, perhaps later this summer with CA9. There is reason to be hopeful we'll get what we wish. One of the necessary parties (CA7) has already been identified; we just don't know who the other party is or when it will happen. In many ways it's like being in high school, eagerly awaiting the loss of your virginity.

Woollard Expectations are High

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Banned

Ultimate Member

Banned

"Quack Pot Call Honker"

President, MSI

Banned

Amateur Rocket Scientist

MD Wear&Carry Instructor

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

"Quack Pot Call Honker"

Banned

Ultimate Member

Banned

President, MSI

Banned

Ultimate Member

Head'n for the hills

Active Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics