Could Cert petition

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
    I just don't see how these states can argue against Wrenn vs DC. I thought once it was settled law, it was the law of the land.

    It's the law of that circuit. The other states are trying to argue against it so Scotus won't step in.
     

    motorcoachdoug

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    The states know that it does create a split and they are really afraid that if SCOTUS does step in they will strike down their G&S Laws as well even tho the DC Circuit is a very small circuit it is still a federal circuit that went against the rest of them..
     

    Blacksmith101

    Grumpy Old Man
    Jun 22, 2012
    22,163
    The states know that it does create a split and they are really afraid that if SCOTUS does step in they will strike down their G&S Laws as well even tho the DC Circuit is a very small circuit it is still a federal circuit that got it right for a change..

    FIFY
     

    danb

    dont be a dumbass
    Feb 24, 2013
    22,704
    google is your friend, I am not.
    DC Circuit is not "very small," certainly in terms of impact. It hears a lot of very important administrative law cases and separation of powers cases (for example) and is considered the 2nd highest court in the land. 4 of the 9 justices came from DC Circuit. If by "very small" you mean "bigly huge," yes that.

    It is kind of a joke to minimize the importance of a split with the DC circuit on a constitutional issue. The kind of joke you dont really want to make in a serious brief. Oh and by the way it tends to lean progressive making the joke even more ironic. But I am sure MA and NJ did not mean it as a joke. They were totally serious.
     

    ras_oscar

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 23, 2014
    1,666
    Just because I'm a curious fellow:

    Say SCOTUS hears the cases and rules that G&S is an unconstitutional restriction on 2A. Does that mean the laws are automatically and immediately voided, or does each state then need to be sued to get the laws reversed?
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,407
    Just because I'm a curious fellow:

    Say SCOTUS hears the cases and rules that G&S is an unconstitutional restriction on 2A. Does that mean the laws are automatically and immediately voided, or does each state then need to be sued to get the laws reversed?

    Nothing is automatic. The other states can either change their "good reason" laws voluntarily or wait to get sued and argue that their law is "different"
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    Nothing is automatic. The other states can either change their "good reason" laws voluntarily or wait to get sued and argue that their law is "different"

    I'd like to see them argue the latter especially when they've briefed every court that their laws are essentially the same.
     

    daNattyFatty

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 27, 2009
    3,908
    Bel Air, MD
    Each state would need to be sued to reverse.



    Nothing is automatic. The other states can either change their "good reason" laws voluntarily or wait to get sued and argue that their law is "different"



    Just because I'm a curious fellow:

    Say SCOTUS hears the cases and rules that G&S is an unconstitutional restriction on 2A. Does that mean the laws are automatically and immediately voided, or does each state then need to be sued to get the laws reversed?



    And, obviously, Maryland would fight it all the way.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
     

    Pope414

    Active Member
    I would love for Rogers to be the vehicle to overturn justifiable need/Good cause laws. Just because of the underhanded BS New Jersey did during the SCOTUS Cert review for Drake.(Accepting Pantano at the NJ Supreme Court just so they could argue that there was an identical case in the state court waiting on opening arguments) once SCOTUS denied cert on Drake the NJSC issued a statement saying Pantano was "Improvendently granted and thus dismissed" I Truly hope Justices Thomas,Alito & Roberts remember the ruse as it would be poetic justice that NJ would be the state that gets justifiable need / Good cause deemed unconstitutional
     

    HoCoShooter

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 25, 2009
    3,517
    Howard County
    Nothing is automatic. The other states can either change their "good reason" laws voluntarily or wait to get sued and argue that their law is "different"



    Really depressing - so MD removes G&S, adds some other similar scheme and therefore kicks the can for another 5 years before having to change it again, etc. Being sued is of no consequence to Frost types who think they are saving us peasants from irreparable harm.

    All this just pisses me off more that the Republican Party is so broken that we couldn’t get almost anything done when we had congress and the WH, let alone National Reciprocity or repealing the NFA.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    In other words, I will most likely never see shall issue in Maryland during my life time. I absolutely hate this @&$%# state.

    Assuming we win at NYSRPA, all held cases by SCOTUS return to lower courts. I'd venture to say Woollard would effectively no longer be good law. The lower courts could rule in our favor this time around.
    If Scotus takes any of the carry cases and we win, then G and S will be impossible to defend in front of any court. All the may issue regimes have said their statutes are essentially the same; they won't be able to say they're now something different.
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,407
    Assuming we win at NYSRPA, all held cases by SCOTUS return to lower courts. I'd venture to say Woollard would effectively no longer be good law. The lower courts could rule in our favor this time around.
    If Scotus takes any of the carry cases and we win, then G and S will be impossible to defend in front of any court. All the may issue regimes have said their statutes are essentially the same; they won't be able to say they're now something different.

    Agreed. Malpasso from the 4th Circuit on the Maryland law will be pending in the SCT at the same time and, if a carry case is decided favorably (e.g., Rogers), the rest of the carry cases will be GVR back to the lower courts. That (a GVR) might even happen after NYSRPA v. NYC is decided. Let's give it a year. My bet is that lots will have changed this time next year.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,934
    Messages
    7,259,571
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom