got it.
thanks
ETA-why are they wasting resources to appeal this? Other than the taxpayers are footing the bill.
thanks
ETA-why are they wasting resources to appeal this? Other than the taxpayers are footing the bill.
Silvester v. Kamala Harris CA 10 Day Wait
- Thread starter MDFF2008
- 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:
krucam
Ultimate Member
I've said before, "Never underestimate the fervor of a rabid anti". They often do things that leave me scratching my head. No sense of keeping losses at a minimum. At least in Illinois, AG Madigan was smart enough to not push Moore/Sheppard, unfortunately.
CA9 upholding this only broadens the reach of the ruling, adds more Sect 1988 funds to the CGF & SAF teams, yada, yada....
danb
dont be a dumbass
Stay denied!
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...g-kamala-harris-fails-california-10-day-wait/
Also, Volokh (“The Court does not know how [the state] prioritizes projects, but dealing with an unconstitutional law should be towards the top of the list”):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...al-law-should-be-towards-the-top-of-the-list/
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...g-kamala-harris-fails-california-10-day-wait/
Also, Volokh (“The Court does not know how [the state] prioritizes projects, but dealing with an unconstitutional law should be towards the top of the list”):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...al-law-should-be-towards-the-top-of-the-list/
shootin the breeze
Missed it by that much
Damn shame that it's starting to look like MD is the worst state in the union for gun rights.
The hits keep on coming 
danb
dont be a dumbass
Good news comes in threes. Also bad news. Harris is 0-2, the constitution is 2-0!
fightinbluhen51
"Quack Pot Call Honker"
- Oct 31, 2008
- 8,974
I fail to see how that is bad news here...
There's always NY and MA.
danb
dont be a dumbass
Bad news for Harris. I hope bad news for her comes in 3s as well, as in denial of en banc in Peruta.
That would also mean, good news comes in 3s, for the constitution!
FIFY
Knuckle Dragger
Active Member
- May 7, 2012
- 213
The coda on this case is that CGF was awarded about $194k in fees and expenses.
Winning is good. Getting paid to win is great.
Winning is good. Getting paid to win is great.
http://michellawyers.com/wp-content...rris_Opening-Brief-of-Defendant-Appellant.pdf
the state filed their opening brief. It looks a lot better than their lower court stuff unfortunately.
the state filed their opening brief. It looks a lot better than their lower court stuff unfortunately.
krucam
Ultimate Member
Thanks for posting Wolfwood. The State's reliance on the 2A 2-step is almost unreal in this one. Saying only a governmental interest in improving public safety is sufficient under Intermediate Scrutiny.
Isn't a more strict analysis required, even under Intermediate? Otherwise, this just becomes Rational Basis scrutiny...
Maestro Pistolero
Active Member
- Mar 20, 2012
- 876
Why on earth are they appealing this? There is no earthly reason to be concerned about a gun owner purchasing a subsequent firearm.
kcbrown
Super Genius
- Jun 16, 2012
- 1,393
Because they want to make it clear to us proles that no matter what was said in Heller, the "right" to arms is in practice a privilege.
(Sent with Tapatalk, so apologies for the lackluster formatting)
Because they lost the 10 wait for permit holders, and the want to keep firearm purchasing as onerous as possible.
krucam
Ultimate Member
Calguns Foundation & SAF filed their Response (Answering) Brief at CA9 (on Appeal by CA) on Tuesday. The 10 day wait was struck down in District Ct for previous gun owners registered within CA.
http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Silvester_Appellees-Answering-Brief.pdf
http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Silvester_Appellees-Answering-Brief.pdf
esqappellate
President, MSI
- Feb 12, 2012
- 7,408
A really good brief. Thanks for sharing.
Oral arguments set at CA9 for Feb 9th http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/calendar/view.php?hearing=February - James R. Browning U.S. Courthouse, San Francisco&dates=8-12&year=2016
Panel is all Dem nominees (Thomas, Nguyen, and Schroeder). Be prepared for a loss and unlike Peruta, will not go en banc.
Panel is all Dem nominees (Thomas, Nguyen, and Schroeder). Be prepared for a loss and unlike Peruta, will not go en banc.
krucam
Ultimate Member
Bump for Oral Arguments at CA9 on Tuesday.
