21-159 APOSHIAN v. GARLAND

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!
  • camo556

    Active Member
    Aug 29, 2021
    2,634
    re-re-re-re-re scheduled
     
    Oct 29, 2021
    740
    Dallas, texas
    In an earlier post I mentioned relisted vs rescheduled.

    When a case is relisted. It has been reviewed and discussed at a conference, but needs to be discussed further at a future conference. The reasons for this can be many.

    When a case is rescheduled. It hasn’t been officially discussed at the conference. The reasons for rescheduling are many. One big reasons is they aren’t ready to discuss or make a decision on this case.

    In regards to THIS actual case why it’s been rescheduled so many times. These are my opinions and I could be wrong.

    1. This case deals more about The use of Chevron Deference, and the exemptions etc around the use of Chevron Deference then on any 2nd or 14th ammendment issues. Those issues will come at a later time. There is at least one case if not two that were heard on oral argument where Chevron Deference was a big issue in those cases. Albeit not with the ATF. It still involved the use or lack there of, of Chevron Deference. Because an opinion and decision have not been released yet, I am suspecting they are holding onto this case pending the outcome of those two cases. They might want those two cases to be issued an opinion, then issue a per curiam on this case. Or even grant review, and issue an opinion without oral arguments.

    2. There is a reason they haven’t put it on hold like they have with Young v Hawaii and ANJRPC v Platkin. Versus rescheduling.

    But let’s suffice it to say… this case getting so many reschedules instead of being reviewed and then denied is a good thing. The case is still alive. I look at all the reschedules as a good thing not a bad one. Usually denials come quite quick, very very few denials have ever been dragged out with multiple reschedules and relists.

    This case has been rescheduled a total of 9 times! (So far)
     

    DC-W

    Active Member
    MDS Supporter
    Patriot Picket
    Jan 23, 2013
    25,292
    ️‍
    Is 9 times a record or just another day in the life of a SC case?


    Another day.

    Caveat however:
    As a practical matter, the distinction between rescheduling and relisting is great. Relisted cases — particularly newly relisted ones — are much more likely to be granted. Rescheduled cases, by contrast, overwhelmingly wind up being denied, sometimes with a justice writing an opinion respecting denial. So it’s unusual to have so many cases moving from the unhappy status of serial rescheduling to the happy status of being relisted.
    https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/01/...xy-voting-the-ministerial-exception-and-more/
     
    Oct 29, 2021
    740
    Dallas, texas
    11th time… I still say they are holding it off till they release NYSPRA. However what gets me, is why they just haven’t put it on hold like they did with Young v Hawaii and ANJRPC.
     

    camo556

    Active Member
    Aug 29, 2021
    2,634
    11th time… I still say they are holding it off till they release NYSPRA. However what gets me, is why they just haven’t put it on hold like they did with Young v Hawaii and ANJRPC.
    Why its been rescheduled vs just getting held is the ten billion dollar question.

    I go back and forth. Why take so long for a dissent from denial of cert?

    Could also be pending WV et al vs EPA. That case involves the major questions doctrine, but Chevron comes up a lot. Or pending some other case working up through the appeals courts.
     
    Oct 29, 2021
    740
    Dallas, texas
    Why its been rescheduled vs just getting held is the ten billion dollar question.

    I go back and forth. Why take so long for a dissent from denial of cert?

    Could also be pending WV et al vs EPA. That case involves the major questions doctrine, but Chevron comes up a lot. Or pending some other case working up through the appeals courts.

    You do bring up some good points. There are several other non 2A related cases pending an opinion that involves Chevron Defference. So it’s possible it could be waiting on one of those cases.

    however, the 10 million dollar question is still why reschedule vs Holding. If one is going to deny cert, why so long to write a dissent. Over 3 months. So I bet it’s still waiting on one or more cases for SCOTUS to issue an opinion.

    Either way, time is running out for all decisions.
     

    jcutonilli

    Active Member
    Mar 28, 2013
    2,237
    Why its been rescheduled vs just getting held is the ten billion dollar question.

    I go back and forth. Why take so long for a dissent from denial of cert?

    Could also be pending WV et al vs EPA. That case involves the major questions doctrine, but Chevron comes up a lot. Or pending some other case working up through the appeals courts.

    I believe it is an interlocutory appeal just like Guedes. I suspect that the rescheduling has to do with the fact that it is an interlocutory appeal. They tend not to take interlocutory appeals.
     

    camo556

    Active Member
    Aug 29, 2021
    2,634
    I believe it is an interlocutory appeal just like Guedes. I suspect that the rescheduling has to do with the fact that it is an interlocutory appeal. They tend not to take interlocutory appeals.
    Maybe.

    The docket for Dobbs (and some others) shows "rescheduled". Dobbs was "rescheduled" some number of times, then it was simply relisted, then it was granted. I searched the docket a while ago for "rescheduled" cases. If there is a pattern, it's not obvious to me. Some ended up granted some denied without comment. Some denied with a dissent.
     
    Oct 29, 2021
    740
    Dallas, texas
    Maybe.

    The docket for Dobbs (and some others) shows "rescheduled". Dobbs was "rescheduled" some number of times, then it was simply relisted, then it was granted. I searched the docket a while ago for "rescheduled" cases. If there is a pattern, it's not obvious to me. Some ended up granted some denied without comment. Some denied with a dissent.

    it’s one thing to reschedule cases a few times before SCOTUS makes a final decision of some sort. It IS a rarity That a case is rescheduled so many times. Most dissents for denied cases are not 20+ page essays. Thus not requiring months to research and write. Dissents are not as important as issuing a Majority opinion which directly effects future cases much more so then dissents.

    Something MORE is going on behind the scenes. What? Is all speculation.

    Here are some undisputed facts.

    1. There are several cases regarding Chevron Deference already waiting on SCOTUS to issue a decision and opinion. Those cases one way or another will have a direct impact on THIS case, as long as this case has not been decided or denied Prior to those other cases decisions and opinions being released.


    2. The Legal question of this case is not about the constitutionality of Bump Stocks. But on Chevron Deference and how it relates to criminal law, ambiguity and a federal agency, or should criminal law be exclusive to the legislature.

    Keep in mind that even if we win this case on Chevron Deference. It would not keep any state legislature or our Federal congress from passing a law to ban bump stocks. If that were to happen it would require a new law suit based on other legal grounds such as the 2A or 14a or 5A depending on how the law was written.
     
    Oct 29, 2021
    740
    Dallas, texas
    I also think, JMHO it will be a conference right after they issue the decision and opinion on the other Chevron Deference case that is still waiting on the decision and opinion. (American Hospital association v Becerra 20-1114)

    That case has the issue of Chevron Deference involved as well, but in slightly different reasoning.

    However, depending on how that Opinion is written it is possible it could have an effect on this case and on the GOA case.

    They might also do a per curiam on this case based on the AHA case too. We will have to see.
     
    Last edited:
    Oct 29, 2021
    740
    Dallas, texas
    May 17 2022Rescheduled.

    This case, along with Guedes v ATF could impact the decisions in PMF /80%.
    We Will See.....


    This case, as well as the AHA case since it revolves around Chevron Difference WILL have an impact on ALL regulations and opinions and rules instigated by the ATF. Including all definitions of what’s considered a machine gun, etc… as well as any and all other future attempts by the ATF to attempt to interpret and laws passed by congress.

    This goes much deeper into what it will Allow the ATF to do in regards to its current and future rules.

    Now keep in mind. The case will have ZERO Impact on any future law that congress might pass directly on banning bump stocks.
     

    camo556

    Active Member
    Aug 29, 2021
    2,634
    Just WOW.....
    May 24 2022Rescheduled.

    I see- 16 times
    They are waiting for GOA v Garland (conference late June) and/or EPA vs West Virginia.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    264,584
    Messages
    6,804,411
    Members
    31,181
    Latest member
    dfrance

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom