SAF SUES IN MARYLAND OVER HANDGUN PERMIT DENIAL UPDATED 3-5-12

Merlin · Jul 2, 2012

eyesinpines said:
This is a forum. As such it invites differing opinions based upon ones point of view.

Provided this is done with civility, it requires tolerance and understanding from those who do not share that point of view and in turn invites their response.

There is no reason or excuse for poor manners or criticiscm of anyone because they do not share your point of view. If you do not wish to participate in a civil discourse you are indeed better of not posting anything.

So far as thread drift is concerned, this is a concern of most of us. However, if you look at the title of this thread, and consider where we're at, if we keep everything ON topic there will be a big fat silence! I would think therefore that a little latitude is in order less we all die of Legg boredom while we wait.

Can't we all just get along?

Merlin · Jul 2, 2012

Patrick said:
Immediate, before the state could react to the order.

The temp is designed to give all parties time to carefully construct arguments and for the court to respond in measured tone.

These things are fairly standard when something big happens. If you were to poll pro-gun legal watchers and attorneys before Woollard what would happen post-win, they probably would almost uniformly say, "stayed." The fact the court appears to be seriously contemplating something else is a pleasant surprise.

If anything, I have heard from multiple trustworthy sources that some in the state are seriously nervous. If they have to issue permits, they all pretty much suspect one of the main arguments of their appeal (public safety) will be eviscerated by actual experience. In this case, time will work against them and we will be the ones hoping for delays in the case, if only to get more time under our belts to prove that "nothing happened" when MD went shall-issue. Imagine that - MSI and MDS members hoping the court slows down!

While I cannot say for certain, it's pretty clear that NYC, Chicago and the rest have worked this case. They must also be on edge. If MD starts issuing, then their cases are also weakened. This is kind of a line-in-the-sand issue for them, whereas for us it's "just a delay". In other words, the stakes are much higher for the state than for us. A stay slows us down whereas lifting the stay will seriously damage their claims.

Patrick,

IF/when G&S is shot down in the 4th, will Maryland be considered a Shall Issue state? I know with G&S out of the way it will be a little easier to get a permit, but MD will still have the other hoop we will have to jump through that I think true shall issues states do not have?

Hopalong · Jul 2, 2012

Merlin said:
Patrick,

IF/when G&S is shot down in the 4th, will Maryland be considered a Shall Issue state? I know with G&S out of the way it will be a little easier to get a permit, but MD will still have the other hoop we will have to jump through that I think true shall issues states do not have?

If I may?

Legg's ruling in Wollard wouldn't suddenly make Maryland "Shall Issue" if it's ultimately upheld. All it did was strike the G&S clause from the existing handgun permit laws. We'd have to see what SCOTUS says (assuming the State appeals and SCOTUS hears it) and then what the state legislature puts forward in place of the existing permit laws after a loss before we can answer that.

But it's all still progress in the right direction. Slow progress, but progress.

Merlin · Jul 2, 2012

Hopalong said:
If I may?

Legg's ruling in Wollard wouldn't suddenly make Maryland "Shall Issue" if it's ultimately upheld. All it did was strike the G&S clause from the existing handgun permit laws. We'd have to see what SCOTUS says (assuming the State appeals and SCOTUS hears it) and then what the state legislature puts forward in place of the existing permit laws after a loss before we can answer that.

But it's all still progress in the right direction. Slow progress, but progress.

Let me ask this, Judge Legg made his ruling in March and then put the stay in place and may or may not remain in place during the entire appeal in the 4th.

My question is, if the 4th agrees and upholds judge Legg ruling, can the state asks for yet another stay as they try to head to the SCOTUS, or are all stays droped after the 4th and will not be in place during anytime between the 4th and the SCOTUS?

jonnyl · Jul 2, 2012

Patrick said:
snip...

If anything, I have heard from multiple trustworthy sources that some in the state are seriously nervous. If they have to issue permits, they all pretty much suspect one of the main arguments of their appeal (public safety) will be eviscerated by actual experience. In this case, time will work against them and we will be the ones hoping for delays in the case, if only to get more time under our belts to prove that "nothing happened" when MD went shall-issue. Imagine that - MSI and MDS members hoping the court slows down!
..snip

It's pretty pathetic that they're actually thinking "uh oh, the truth may come out". If they don't really believe what they're saying why fight so hard??

I know many are being told what to "think" by their over-zealous bosses, but the legislators not seeing the truth is way more frustrating than the judiciary taking time for thoughtful responses...

Merlin · Jul 2, 2012

jonnyl said:
It's pretty pathetic that they're actually thinking "uh oh, the truth may come out". If they don't really believe what they're saying why fight so hard??

I know many are being told what to "think" by their over-zealous bosses, but the legislators not seeing the truth is way more frustrating than the judiciary taking time for thoughtful responses...

Why I also think it does not make any sense is because the noble sounding cause they are claiming of public safety is not the real reason they are fighting. I think they just like the power, but they just can't come out and say that's the reason. So they have to come up with a noble sounding reason like public safety and how they are so concerned about our well fair.

dblas · Jul 2, 2012

Merlin said:
Let me ask this, Judge Legg made his ruling in March and then put the stay in place and may or may not remain in place during the entire appeal in the 4th.

My question is, if the 4th agrees and upholds judge Legg ruling, can the state asks for yet another stay as they try to head to the SCOTUS, or are all stays droped after the 4th and will not be in place during anytime between the 4th and the SCOTUS?

I believe this question has already been answered, and I could be wrong, but if the CA4 upholds Judge Legg's decision, the State could ask for a writ of certiorari from SCOTUS. But unless the State is granted Cert, they have no chance at an additional stay.

(Patrick, Krucam or ESq. will be along to correct me if I am wrong in what I read before)

DB

rambling_one · Jul 2, 2012

I have assumed "senior status" (retired) and on vacation (Michigan).

When I get back to MD I hope we have electricty and Judge Legg has satisfied us all.

fxdunigan · Jul 2, 2012

eyesinpines said:
This is a forum. As such it invites differing opinions based upon ones point of view.

Provided this is done with civility, it requires tolerance and understanding from those who do not share that point of view and in turn invites their response.

There is no reason or excuse for poor manners or criticiscm of anyone because they do not share your point of view. If you do not wish to participate in a civil discourse you are indeed better of not posting anything.

So far as thread drift is concerned, this is a concern of most of us. However, if you look at the title of this thread, and consider where we're at, if we keep everything ON topic there will be a big fat silence! I would think therefore that a little latitude is in order less we all die of Legg boredom while we wait.

Can't we all just get along?

Thanks to folks like Merlin, Patrick and esqappellate, there is interesting and educational information in these 543 pages over the past two years and I’ve enjoyed reading them all.

But for those of us with limited time, trying to keep our ear to the rail about Legg & Wollard, it is getting frustrating with the persistent…
Are we there yet? NO! Are we there yet? NO! Are we there yet? NO!

For differing opinions and ones point of view about judges, stays, retirement, SCOTUS, Obamacare, CA4 and the rest of our judicial system, perhaps one of the other 84,103 threads, including the 2,897 that focus on Maryland 2A Issues might be a better place to share those topics?

This topic here is: SAF SUES IN MARYLAND OVER HANDGUN PERMIT DENIAL, and if there’s nothing to discuss about the case, because it's gone quiet, a little silence would be golden.

But if the moderators consider all the chatter ON topic, the other option is to unsubscribe and hope http://marylandshallissue.org/ will broadcast a message to their membership when there is finally something important to report from Judge Legg?

I joined and subscribed to their e-mail alerts back in March… http://marylandshallissue.org/subscribe-to-email-alert/

So I'm just about ready to pull the unsubscribe trigger on this one. :indiffere

safecracker · Jul 2, 2012

You all have waited all your lives for the opportunity to CCW in Maryland.

That being said, a few more weeks or even months isn't going to hurt. Hell, even a year won't be that bad if you look where we were four months ago.

So, calm down and quit the whining and the wildassed speculation. It will happen when it's supposed to.

INMY01TA · Jul 2, 2012

fxdunigan said:
This topic here is: SAF SUES IN MARYLAND OVER HANDGUN PERMIT DENIAL, and if there’s nothing to discuss about the case, because it's gone quiet, a little silence would be golden.

But if the moderators consider all the chatter ON topic, the other option is to unsubscribe and hope http://marylandshallissue.org/ will broadcast a message to their membership when there is finally something important to report

I believe Norton came in here a few days ago and cleaned up 50 or so off topic posts and requested that we keep it on track but I guess others don't get the message.

Patrick · Jul 2, 2012

Merlin said:
Patrick,

IF/when G&S is shot down in the 4th, will Maryland be considered a Shall Issue state? I know with G&S out of the way it will be a little easier to get a permit, but MD will still have the other hoop we will have to jump through that I think true shall issues states do not have?

We are Shall-Issue today, but the practical effect of the stay is such that it is able to be ignored by the state. The stay does nothing to change the ruling issued in March: Maryland's law is unconstitutional on its face.

The stay was a smart way for the court to ascertain whether Maryland should be able to ignore that result while they appeal it. Won't rehash the rationale in this post, but it's pretty normal. What is unusual is that the court took extra effort to ask some particular questions about "harm" that the state would suffer. That suggests the court is seriously contemplating lifting the stay, and that is something surprising to a number of people nationwide.

But let it be understood: Maryland's laws are unconstitutional until a higher court says otherwise. They cannot deny that.

Merlin said:
Let me ask this, Judge Legg made his ruling in March and then put the stay in place and may or may not remain in place during the entire appeal in the 4th.

My question is, if the 4th agrees and upholds judge Legg ruling, can the state asks for yet another stay as they try to head to the SCOTUS, or are all stays droped after the 4th and will not be in place during anytime between the 4th and the SCOTUS?

Any court above this District Court can entertain and issue a stay. Those courts are the 4th Circuit and the Supreme Court itself.

If Maryland does not get a stay in District or the Circuit, they may well ask for one in the Supreme Court. That would be prior to the final ruling from the 4th. If SCOTUS says "no", then asking again while cert is pending is kinda odd.

The scenario you suggest could only really take place if some sort of stay takes effect now from the 4th or the District, but that we win next year. In such case, Maryland would cry to SCOTUS. I think it's rare they issue such a stay if their appellate courts have well-reasoned rationale in their decision. But who knows?

All of this is about ten steps down the road. We're still trying to guess step #1.

eyesinpines · Jul 2, 2012

Why not start another thread, " Judge Legg Stay decision" and let it sit dormant until something happens. Those that are so inclined could check whenever they feel like it and absent info simply check out again?

swinokur · Jul 2, 2012

How about a thread that contains whining, guessing, conjecture and conspiracy theories and leave the original thread alone?

krucam · Jul 2, 2012

On 6/22 we had Amici-Day for the Appellants, State of MD. One of the four was a "locked" Amicus from American College of Preventive Medicine and American Public Health Association.

See #38 from the CA4 Docket...

06/25/2012 38
29 pg, 635.65 KB Corrected AMICUS CURIAE/INTERVENOR BRIEF by Amici Supporting Appellant American College of Preventive Medicine and American Public Health Association in electronic and paper format. Type of Brief: Amicus Curiae. Method of Filing Paper Copies: courier. Date Paper Copies Mailed, Dispatched, or Delivered to Court: 06/21/2012. [998881891] [12-1437] Jennifer DeRose

06/25/2012 39
2 pg, 6.22 KB ORDER filed [998881933] granting filing of amicus curiae brief (FRAP 29(e)) Party added: Legal Historians. Copies to all parties. [12-1437] (DL)

06/25/2012 40
1 pg, 48.54 KB DISCLOSURE OF CORPORATE AFFILIATIONS (Local Rule 26.1) by Amicus Supporting Appellant Legal Historians. Was any question on Disclosure Form answered yes? No [998881949] [12-1437] (DL)

06/25/2012 41
1 pg, 7.42 KB DOCKETING FORMS FOLLOW-UP NOTICE ISSUED to Erin Murphy for Amicus Supporting Appellant Legal Historians, Dwight William Stone, II for Amicus Supporting Appellant Legal Historians and Mr. Andrew Clayton White for Amicus Supporting Appellant Legal Historians re: filing of appearance form (Loc.R. 46(g)). Appearance form due on 06/28/2012 from Erin Murphy, Dwight William Stone II and Andrew Clayton White. Mailed to: Erin Murphy. [12-1437] (DL)

06/25/2012 42
2 pg, 6.21 KB ORDER filed [998881986] granting filing of amicus curiae brief (FRAP 29(e)) Party added: Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, Maryland Chiefs of Police Association, International Brotherhood of Police Officers and Major Cities Chiefs Association. Copies to all parties. Mailed to: Erin Murphy, Jonathan Lowy, Daniel Vice, S. Chartey Quarcoo, Matthew Sullivan. [12-1437] (DL)

06/25/2012 43
1 pg, 20.86 KB DISCLOSURE OF CORPORATE AFFILIATIONS (Local Rule 26.1) by Amici Supporting Appellant Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, International Brotherhood of Police Officers, Major Cities Chiefs Association and Maryland Chiefs of Police Association. Was any question on Disclosure Form answered yes? No [998881996] [12-1437] (DL)

06/25/2012 44
1 pg, 7.7 KB DOCKETING FORMS FOLLOW-UP NOTICE ISSUED to Jonathan Lee Diesenhaus for Amici Supporting Appellant Maryland Chiefs of Police Association, International Brotherhood of Police Officers and Major Cities Chiefs Association, Mr. Jonathan Elias Lowy for Amicus Supporting Appellant Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, S. Chartey Quarcoo for Amici Supporting Appellant Maryland Chiefs of Police Association, International Brotherhood of Police Officers and Major Cities Chiefs Association, Matthew C. Sullivan for Amici Supporting Appellant Maryland Chiefs of Police Association, International Brotherhood of Police Officers and Major Cities Chiefs Association and Daniel R. Vice for Amicus Supporting Appellant Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence re: filing of appearance form (Loc.R. 46(g)). Appearance form due on 06/28/2012 from Jonathan Lee Diesenhaus, Jonathan Elias Lowy, S. Chartey Quarcoo, Matthew C. Sullivan and Daniel R. Vice. Mailed to: Jonathan Lowy, Erin Murphy, W. Chartey Quarcoo, Matthew Sullivan, Daniel Vice. [12-1437] (DL)

06/25/2012 46 AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF (PAPER) file-stamped, on behalf of American College of Preventive Medicine and American Public Health Association. Number of pages: [29]. Entered on Docket Date: 06/25/2012.[998882050] [12-1437] (DL)

06/25/2012 47
1 pg, 19.79 KB APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL (Local Rule 46(c)) by Jonathan L. Diesenhaus for Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.[998882251] [12-1437] Jonathan Diesenhaus

Guessing only...I'm thinking that whatever was in the first Amicus that required it being "locked" was corrected/omitted/redacted. Only speculation.

The original 6/22 Amicus has been stricken from the docket.

06/22/2012 25 Open Restricted Document
0 pg, 0 KB AMICUS CURIAE/INTERVENOR BRIEF - ENTRY STRUCK--[Edited 06/25/2012 by DL] Jennifer DeRose

Mr H · Jul 2, 2012

krucam said:
On 6/22 we had Amici-Day for the Appellants, State of MD. One of the four was a "locked" Amicus from American College of Preventive Medicine and American Public Health Association.

See #38 from the CA4 Docket...

Guessing only...I'm thinking that whatever was in the first Amicus that required it being "locked" was corrected/omitted/redacted. Only speculation.

The original 6/22 Amicus has been stricken from the docket.

Thanks for the diligence, Mark...

Correcting a segment of p2...

In Maryland alone, more than 95% of the more than 300 firearm-related homicides (IN AND OF THEMSELVES ILLEGAL ACTS) in 2009 were committed with an ILLEGALLY CARRIED handgun. ILLEGAL Carrying of handguns in public places can produce an effect analogous to a disease contagion, in which persons feel the need to UNLAWFULLY arm themselves - and to more readily fire those weapons - when they perceive that others are also ILLEGALLYcarrying firearms.

I'll read more later... but that jumped out at me and colored the brief... well... stilted.

INMY01TA · Jul 2, 2012

swinokur said:
How about a thread that contains whining, guessing, conjecture and conspiracy theories and leave the original thread alone?

I'm all for the seperate whining thread. A couple of people in this thread could fill 10 pages in a day.

krucam · Jul 2, 2012

INMY01TA said:
I'm all for the seperate whining thread. A couple of people in this thread could fill 10 pages in a day.

I'm done....

swinokur · Jul 2, 2012

eyesinpines · Jul 2, 2012

swinokur said:
How about a thread that contains whining, guessing, conjecture and conspiracy theories and leave the original thread alone?

You are really getting snarky and mean spirited now.

So how about one for eternal optimistic disciples of Dorothy & Toto. Those who believe that clicking red shoes together will always get the right result. Those that believe that even tin Judges have hearts of gold. Those that can only see the blue sky behind the thunderclouds.

Let's all skip gaily down the Yellowbrick road to Munchkinland because there's only good things there. Maybe you could start that one?

SAF SUES IN MARYLAND OVER HANDGUN PERMIT DENIAL UPDATED 3-5-12

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Man of Many Nicknames

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Past President, MSI

Ultimate Member

MSI Executive Member

Unrepentant Sinner

Ultimate Member

MSI Executive Member

Active Member

In a State of Bliss

Ultimate Member

Attachments

Banana'd

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

In a State of Bliss

Active Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics