21-159 APOSHIAN v. GARLAND

[Texasgrillchef]

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

NOPE,

If you read this case carefully you will note the issue at hand is an issue referred to as Chevron Defference.
SCOTUS has Already heard a case on Chevron Defference and it’s pending an Opinion to be released soon.

the case is:

American Hospital Association v. Becerra 20-1114​

Once a. Decision Has been made and a opinion released. This case will be given its finality. Either through a PC with opinions and dissents, or it will be denied. Or it will be granted for further hearings.

My opinion is that it will be given PC.

The GOA case is also using Chevron Defference as well. Yet because of when the GOA case filed a petition for cert. it is much further down the food the chain so to speak then Aposhian.

Odds are that the GOA case even get scheduled for a conference hearing this term. However there won’t be a need. The reason being the AHA case.

If the AHA case is found in our favor, then a PC will be issued for it as well as for Aposhian and any other case relying on the use of Chevron Defference.

If found in our favor, it will severely limit the power of the ATF and its rules making. It will also cause many of its current rules to be questioned. As well as put a halt to many of the future rules currently in the works to be Implemented.

However, keep in mind that congress, including any of the state legislatures could come in and pass a bill making it unlawful to own or possess a bump stock. If that happens, then a new lawsuit will be needed to fight these new laws on a state or federal basis.

 

[pcfixer]

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-159/191418/20210903154127055_Aposhian%20v.%20Garland%20amicus%20brief.pdf

Quoted
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
In January 2019, the Petitioner filed an action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah seeking, among other remedies, a preliminary injunction to enjoin enforcement of a regulation promulgated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (“ATF”) which reclassified so called “bump stocks” as “machineguns” in 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b). See Final Rule, Bump-Stock-Type Devices, 83 Fed. Reg. 66514 (Dec. 26, 2018). The district court denied the preliminary injunction, holding that the ATF’s interpretation of the statutory language was the best reading of the statute. Petitioner then filed an "interlocutory appeal" in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, challenging the denial of a preliminary injunction. On appeal, a divided panel of the Tenth Circuit upheld the denial of a preliminary injunction, but applied and expressly relied upon Chevron deference without addressing the best meaning of the statutory language in § 5845(b). The panel majority noted that the parties themselves were “oddly in agreement” that Chevron should not apply in deciding the case. Petition Appendix (“App.”) 12a. Yet panel majority went on first to conclude that Chevron, rather than traditional tools of statutory interpretation, should be used at the outset, announcing the court’s task to determine merely whether the ATF “‘acted within its authority’” in promulgating the Final Rule. Id.

SO..
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
Courts of appeals, including the one below, have improperly chosen to use Chevron deference to decide multiple cases involving bump stocks, despite the parties having argued in each case that the relevant statutory language is unambiguous, despite the fact that Congress never gave ATF authority to create new substantive prohibitions, despite the fact that the 6 statutory prohibition at issue carries stiff criminal penalties, and despite the principle that a court should apply traditional tools of statutory interpretation before resorting to Chevron deference.

 

[pcfixer]

I was not aware of this.....
SCOTUS has Already heard a case on Chevron Defference and it’s pending an Opinion to be released soon.

the case is: Argued Nov 30, 2021

American Hospital Association v. Becerra 20-1114​

 

[Inigoes]

I was not aware of this.....
SCOTUS has Already heard a case on Chevron Defference and it’s pending an Opinion to be released soon.

the case is: Argued Nov 30, 2021

American Hospital Association v. Becerra 20-1114​

The other Chevron deference case heard this session is "WV v EPA"

 

[eruby]

 

[pcfixer]

20-1530 Feb 28 2022

Argued.

Aahh... Not really Cheveron ....JMHO.
Quoted.
The Ninth Circuit also recognized an exception to deference principles where “an agency’s interpretation involves an issue of deep economic and political significance”

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-1530/176915/20210429133443663_2021.04.29%20-%20West%20Virginia%20v.%20EPA%20Petition.pdf

 

[camo556]

NOPE,

If you read this case carefully you will note the issue at hand is an issue referred to as Chevron Defference.
SCOTUS has Already heard a case on Chevron Defference and it’s pending an Opinion to be released soon.

Double Nope.

The normal course of action if the SC is holding a case pending the outcome different case is for the docket to go dark, no more reschedules (See Young v HI, Bianchi v Frosh, ANJRPC v. Platkin)...

This case is "rescheduled," which means it has NOT been considered for conference. It is most likely not being held pending some other outcome.

Someone is holding this case from conference pending some other event, not the outcome in another argued case. Most likely, GOA v Garland (this is what they did for Dobbs, they waited then looked at another case simultaneously).

The trouble with the Chevron deference advocates is that it depends which side you believe. They may want to decide on Chevron grounds, or the rule of leniency or some other grounds. They may want to opine on the best statutory interpretation. Since they have not even considered it for conference, its hard to know what they are thinking here.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

The other Chevron deference case heard this session is "WV v EPA"

20-1530 Feb 28 2022

Argued.

Aahh... Not really Cheveron ....JMHO.
Quoted.
The Ninth Circuit also recognized an exception to deference principles where “an agency’s interpretation involves an issue of deep economic and political significance”

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-1530/176915/20210429133443663_2021.04.29%20-%20West%20Virginia%20v.%20EPA%20Petition.pdf

Double Nope.

The normal course of action if the SC is holding a case pending the outcome different case is for the docket to go dark, no more reschedules (See Young v HI, Bianchi v Frosh, ANJRPC v. Platkin)...

This case is "rescheduled," which means it has NOT been considered for conference. It is most likely not being held pending some other outcome.

Someone is holding this case from conference pending some other event, not the outcome in another argued case. Most likely, GOA v Garland (this is what they did for Dobbs, they waited then looked at another case simultaneously).

The trouble with the Chevron deference advocates is that it depends which side you believe. They may want to decide on Chevron grounds, or the rule of leniency or some other grounds. They may want to opine on the best statutory interpretation. Since they have not even considered it for conference, its hard to know what they are thinking here.

I do agree that we have no clue which way they will go with Chevron Defference, leniency or any other issue.

we will know when we know. When AHA is released. we will also know what impact it will have on this case or on the GOA case.

What we do know… is GOA isn’t ready to go to conference yet. Nor has it been scheduled for conference yet. And this case has yet to be denied. They could have denied it along time ago, but for some reason they havent yet. This case had already been rescheduled numerous times before GOA was even filed, as well as even before the En Banc panel has issued their decision and opinion.

So SCOTUS has been delaying this case for other issues beyond GOA. They aren’t going to wait for a case to be decided by an En Banc panel, or wait to see if a Petition would even be filed.

Now as I have said before GOA is probably a better case as 5e En Banc Panel was evenly divided.

I have never speculated we would win this case or GOA n Chevron Defernce. but I do think we should and hope we do.

 

[DC-W]

Aposhian wasn’t rescheduled… Unless something changes between now and conference tomorrow, it will be up for consideration.

 

[jcutonilli]

Aposhian wasn’t rescheduled… Unless something changes between now and conference tomorrow, it will be up for consideration.

It has been rescheduled the day of the conference before (14 Jan). We will wait and see if it actually makes it to conference.

 

[pcfixer]

Jun 06 2022

DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/9/2022.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

Jun 06 2022

DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/9/2022.

interstingly enough, we should get some form of answer today. As if you look at it, it has always been rescheduled BEFORE the date of conference.

Today IS 6/9/2022 and it has not was not rescheduled. Therefore odds are good that today will be the day that this case is either granted, denied, put on hold, or issued a PC.

Hopefully something positive, like a grant, a hold, or a PC. However we won’t know till Monday the 13th when orders are released. I am wondering though if they don’t announce Today or tomorrow that Monday the 13th will be an opinion day as well. If they do, that could actually mean good news. In that maybe they are releasing the two cases on Chevron Defference, and then issuing a PC on this case. Just speculating in a positive fashion.

 

[jcutonilli]

interstingly enough, we should get some form of answer today. As if you look at it, it has always been rescheduled BEFORE the date of conference.

Today IS 6/9/2022 and it has not was not rescheduled. Therefore odds are good that today will be the day that this case is either granted, denied, put on hold, or issued a PC.

Hopefully something positive, like a grant, a hold, or a PC. However we won’t know till Monday the 13th when orders are released. I am wondering though if they don’t announce Today or tomorrow that Monday the 13th will be an opinion day as well. If they do, that could actually mean good news. In that maybe they are releasing the two cases on Chevron Defference, and then issuing a PC on this case. Just speculating in a positive fashion.

It has been rescheduled the day of the conference before (14 Jan). We will wait and see if it actually makes it to conference.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

Just announced, Opinion days for Monday the 13th, and Wednesday the 15th.

However after looking again apparently (posted today) Aposhian Was rescheduled again on June 6th.

We only have two more conferences left. So soon we will get word on this case.

Some say it’s being held for GOA Bump Stock case. I just don’t see the point. Even if the GOA case is a better case. Why not just deny Aposhian Instead of rescheduling more then a dozen times?

Something will happen soon.

 

[Kharn]

It would be very interesting to see them GVR Aposhian saying see AHA, as the plain text of the statute says "single function of the trigger" so Chevron is not even implicated.

 

[Boats]

Rescheduled again as of Jun 16th

 

[camo556]

re-re-re-re-re-{...}-re-scheduled. Wont be considered at Jun23rd conference.

As is the GOA v Garland case.

 

[motorcoachdoug]

Looks like it will be scheduled sometime in Oct or Nov is what I am thinking...

 

[Texasgrillchef]

Looks like it will be scheduled sometime in Oct or Nov is what I am thinking...

I just looked… interesting….

Some cases (none gun case) have been scheduled for the first conference in September.

Well the AHA case had little effect on Chevron Deference other then giving the lower courts a choice to ignore if they choose. Since nothing was even mentioned in the opinion about it.

The West Virginia case against the EPA is about Chevron Deference, or so we would like to think. So now with these two cases rescheduled. (GOA and Aposhian) it makes me wonder if any mention of Chevron Deference will be in the WV Opinion. Or if it will be a DIG. Which I hope it isn’t, being I am from Texas and Oil and Gas are a big resource.

GOA hasn’t been on the books long enough and is reasonable to think it could be pushed to September.

Aposhian, getting pushed to September would make it over a year. Really makes me wonder why they keep rescheduling it. When Aposhian was first rescheduled. We had no clue what the circuit court or even the En Banc ruling and opinion was even going to be, or if it was even going to file a petition for cert with SCOTUS. So I highly doubt SCOTUS was waiting for the GOA case. Even though it’s probably a better case.

Something is holding both the cases up. If it’s the WV case. Then their is no reason to Reschedule. Deny them, or Grant them, or give them a PC. Why wait till next term?

I can see holding Aposhian for GOA now that the GOA case is on the books. But why push conference off until next term?

I don’t think our new Justice replacing Breyer will make that much difference.

So this one is a head scratcher for sure. You would think they would want to clear these off the books, or just grant one and put the other on hold. But they aren’t. And a reschedule is much different then a relist. Although I don’t know why Either make a difference. Both types have been granted in the past, and both types have been denied, as well as both types of cases (relisted and reschedule) have also been given a PC as well.

We won’t know for sure anything until the end of term, and after WV opinion is released.

 

[camo556]

Looks like it will be scheduled sometime in Oct or Nov is what I am thinking...

Of 2024 at this rate.