AG opinion

[Occam]

Not exactly. It’s a formal opinion and perfectly official and binding… in that case. It can’t be cited as precedent because the court either intended to rule very narrowly or isn’t ready to make a policy (legal interpretation, etc.) decision on a subject yet.

That said, the language in that unreported ruling is pretty damn sweeping: the G&S scheme is straight up unconstitutional. Not, "unconstitutional in the way this particular appellant was handled," but "cuz the SCOTUS said this sorta thing is entirely unconstitutional for everybody." That really isn't the sort of language that suggests a focus on one narrow case or circumstance. It would make perfect sense to see if the appellant and his lawyer would be willing to petition the court to publish that ruling. Just rip that bandage off already!

 

[Ulfson]

Note not written by Frosh but an underling.

Looks like MSP was fishing for a reason to keep G&S and got smacked down

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/kipke/pages/25/attachments/original/1657115492/Rossignol_Advice_Letter_-_Good_and_Substantial_Reason_%287.6.22_FINAL%29.pdf?1657115492

Like the Bug said in MIB

“it’s over I won”

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Thank you for posting that letter. It is refreshing to hear the powers that be explain the consequences of the recent Supreme Court decision by soberly laying out the legal ramifications WITHOUT the hysterical grand standing about "gun" violence and the pandering to anti 2A constituencies!

 

[P-12 Norm]

The Letter seems a lot like Cornwallis's surrender to Washington at Yorktown..Frosh didn't have the hair to own up to his loss and write it himself. Sent an underling. Washington had an Underling take Cornwallis's sword. We the People should have the letter framed and hung in the bathroons of every gun club's bathroom as our manner of acceptence.

 

[Jaybeez]

Here is the unreported court of special appeals case that the AG's letter used as a foundation for the advice

https://www.courts.state.md.us/sites/default/files/unreported-opinions/1533s21.pdf

The author of the opinion , Chief Justice Wells, was appointed to his position by Hogan in April of this year
E. Gregory Wells - Wikipedia

E. Gregory Wells - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[jcutonilli]

Of course the letter itself says not to take it seriously since Frosh didn’t write/sign it. Pages of guidance followed by, “But don’t treat this like official advice.” FFS.

That is not what was said, they stated:
"Although this letter is not an official Opinion of the Attorney General, I hope it is responsive to your request."

The fact that they are writing the letter based on an unpublished opinion may have something to do with it. Earlier in the letter they claim "And only a court, not the Office of the Attorney General, can “invalidate an act of the General Assembly.” E.g., 106 Opinions of the
Attorney General at 92." I am guessing they are going to wait until a published opinion is issued before issuing an official opinion.

It is the official advice of the AG, it simply does not qualify as an official opinion.

 

[swinokur]

Since it’s an opinion how can it be official?

Seems like an oxy moron to me


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[scottyfz6]

Note not written by Frosh but an underling.

Looks like MSP was fishing for a reason to keep G&S and got smacked down

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/kipke/pages/25/attachments/original/1657115492/Rossignol_Advice_Letter_-_Good_and_Substantial_Reason_%287.6.22_FINAL%29.pdf?1657115492

Like the Bug said in MIB

“it’s over I won”

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The more I read that, the more I think its not finding a reason to keep G&S, as it is asking if the bruen case did away with it, and two a CYA on asking if they have to wait for a court to say they dont have to keep enforcing it.

It sounds like they took the end around on frosh, and then asked if they have to keep enforcing it. AKA they asked if it was still the law, then asked under what standard they could stop enforcing it. That is a straight up CYA question, they wanted to stop, but wanted to make sure they did not have to wait for a court to say stop.

 

[Blacksmith101]

That said, the language in that unreported ruling is pretty damn sweeping: the G&S scheme is straight up unconstitutional. Not, "unconstitutional in the way this particular appellant was handled," but "cuz the SCOTUS said this sorta thing is entirely unconstitutional for everybody." That really isn't the sort of language that suggests a focus on one narrow case or circumstance. It would make perfect sense to see if the appellant and his lawyer would be willing to petition the court to publish that ruling. Just rip that bandage off already!

Quote from the Unreported Opinions Page my emphasis:
"Most decisions of the Court of Special Appeals are not reported, as Maryland Rule 8-605.1 requires the Court to report only those opinions that are of substantial interest."

I would venture to say this opinion has substantial interest not only in Maryland but also nationally.

 

[rseymorejr]

I bet if you tried to give him a proctology exam you couldn’t get a finger in


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

With him, where would you even start?

 

[rseymorejr]

I bet if you tried to give him a proctology exam you couldn’t get a finger in


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

With him, where would you even start?

 

[rseymorejr]

I bet if you tried to give him a proctology exam you couldn’t get a finger in


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

With him, where would you even start?

 

[Muleskinner]

This is a textbook reason why any bill in any legislature that directly affects or potentially affects a constitutional right should be required to have approval at least at the state supreme court level prior to being signed into law. Preferably at the supreme Court level.

With regards to the LETTER. I have yet to see a "violent gun" that "committed Gun Violence" Frishie boy, Show us one gun that violently either shot itself suicide style or one that shot at humans with intent to commit a crime, or murdered any humans.

The Attorney General has made clear that he
disagrees with the Court’s decision and that, in his view, the decision will lead to “more
deaths and more pain in a country already awash in gun violence.

Frosh is right about more deaths...now that Marylanders will have the ability to defend themselves I expect the death toll to climb a bit...but the prison population won't go up as fast...

and there is no such thing as gun violence...

 

[jcutonilli]

Thank you for that Inigoes!

I still don't understand this unreported opinion thing, and how the decision cannot be cited...WTF?

Non-publication of legal opinions in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It has to do with precedent and which cases should be relied upon to determine precedent.

Most cases are not used to establish precedent.

 

[jcutonilli]

Since it’s an opinion how can it be official?

Seems like an oxy moron to me


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

There is a difference between an opinion and advice

Maryland Attorney General

The Attorney General is the chief legal officer of the State. The Attorney General's Office has general charge, supervision and direction of the legal business of the State, acting as legal advisors and representatives of the major agencies, various boards, commissions, officials and...

www.marylandattorneygeneral.gov

The letter simply communicates legal advice rather than a formal opinion of the AG

 

[E.Shell]

In this instance the Governor and AG were looking for an out, because they did not want to be the first to acknowledge NYSRPA v Bruen.

If they were to wait for Whalen or Call, they would come under enormous pressure to be the first.

They searched high and low and came up with this out of the way decision for a fella. The judge made it an unpublished opinion so no one else could use it as precedent. The decision is unique onto the defendant.

This was perfect for the AG's Office and the Governor, they were not the first and it can't be used to further the reinstatement of the 2A.

We must wait for Whalen or Call to drive the last nail into the Good and substantial reason coffin, so there will not only be precedent at the federal level, but as the state as well.

Not exactly. It’s a formal opinion and perfectly official and binding… in that case. It can’t be cited as precedent because the court either intended to rule very narrowly or isn’t ready to make a policy (legal interpretation, etc.) decision on a subject yet.

A party to a case can petition the court to publish the unpublished opinion if they want to. Basically, convincing the court that the decision is important and will be useful to other litigants and lower courts in deciding future cases… for reasons.

It’s not a secret order thing and there’s no subterfuge here.

In this case, exactly what Inigoes said above.

-Rob

Thank you to both of you for the schooling!!

 

[daNattyFatty]

The cowardice just amazes me. Though, it shouldn’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[CrueChief]

Here is the unreported court of special appeals case that the AG's letter used as a foundation for the advice

https://www.courts.state.md.us/sites/default/files/unreported-opinions/1533s21.pdf

larry's msp railroading this poor guy. larry is a friend of ours how?

 

[Stoveman]

larry's msp railroading this poor guy. larry is a friend of ours how?

Ed Zachary, and yet some here want more of the same with his mini me.

 

[Crazytrain]

larry's msp railroading this poor guy. larry is a friend of ours how?

Larry has never been a friend. More disinterested spectator than active enemy, though. He might not help, but he doesn't go out of his way to cause harm for the most part. Sadly, he's probably the best we are going to able to do unless there is a serious cultural shift. An unfortunate reality. I suspect that once we get our next governor we will be pining for the days of the plump one.

 

[swinokur]

Anyone who denies my enumerated right to self defense is my enemy

Eff the fat bastard


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk