Montgomery County Bill 21-22

[cap6888]

Read the argument. Very well laid out. Of course I am biased, but it seems like a no brained to enact the TRO and eventually nix the law.

 

[Sunrise]

The proposed is designed to get something in a tro right away and is the product of the judge’s resistance to doing any tro as evidenced at the conference yesterday. It is a temporary partial fix. The final relief sought remains much broader

Resistance to doing any TRO for this?.... Incredible.

Well-written stuff. Thank you for all you do.

 

[IronEye]

Agree, it seems like it is a slam dunk. The law is an egregious attack against civil rights and a direct slap at the Supreme Count. I hope this judge sees it that way but judges have largely disappointed me in the past.
Thank you MSI for all you do!

 

[Sunrise]

Agree, it seems like it is a slam dunk. The law is an egregious attack against civil rights and a direct slap at the Supreme Count. I hope this judge sees it that way but judges have largely disappointed me in the past.
Thank you MSI for all you do!

It definitely seems like it. Three Supreme Court Justices live in Montgomery County (Roberts, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh), and as you said, this law was clearly an attempted "clapback" at the Court. I hope this Judge winds up being reasonable and seeing the light to dispense with this quickly, or that he gets a well-deserved rebuke on appeal from his "superiors".

The wheels of justice turn slowly, but grind exceedingly fine...

 

[swinokur]

Obama appointee- no surprise

 

[Bertfish]

The proposed is designed to get something in a tro right away and is the product of the judge’s resistance to doing any tro as evidenced at the conference yesterday. It is a temporary partial fix. The final relief sought remains much broader

What was the reasoning given to resist a TRO?

 

[swinokur]

Because he’s a liberal

 

[LuckyShot]

Because he’s a liberal

were the federal judges who reviewed the multiple NY gun cases Libs?

 

[swinokur]

No idea. You tell me

Look at the lib judge in the 4CA hearing yesterday. Her bias was blatantly obvious

That will be a 2-1 win for us

 

[pcfixer]

No idea. You tell me

Look at the lib judge in the 4CA hearing yesterday. Her bias was blatantly obvious

That will be a 2-1 win for us

Yep. 100%

 

[csanc123]

Ignore...was looking at wrong damn pdf.

 

[Bob A]

A pi and a tro motion are by their nature on a fast track. But the time of the ruling is up to the judge

As in "sometime after my retirement"?

 

[LuckyShot]

No idea. You tell me

Look at the lib judge in the 4CA hearing yesterday. Her bias was blatantly obvious

That will be a 2-1 win for us

Yea not disagreeing, i was genuinely curious.

 

[pcfixer]

maybe show this to the Judge.

 

[Sunrise]

It just so happens that Andrew Raymond, the owner of Engage Armament named in the recent shooting incident, is one of the Plaintiffs in the lawsuit against this MoCo Law:

From Page 7 of MSI's filed Memorandum document:

Plaintiffs Andrew Raymond and Carlos Rabanales are co-owners of Engage and both work at and commute to Engage on a daily basis. Both individuals have wear and carry permits issued by the Maryland State Police and have in the past and intend to in the future possessed and transported firearms at or within 100 yards of the locations in which such activities are now banned by Chapter 57. Id. ¶¶ 57-62.

 

[coinboy]

It just so happens that Andrew Raymond, the owner of Engage Armament named in the recent shooting incident, is one of the Plaintiffs in the lawsuit against this MoCo Law:

From Page 7 of MSI's filed Memorandum document:

Plaintiffs Andrew Raymond and Carlos Rabanales are co-owners of Engage and both work at and commute to Engage on a daily basis. Both individuals have wear and carry permits issued by the Maryland State Police and have in the past and intend to in the future possessed and transported firearms at or within 100 yards of the locations in which such activities are now banned by Chapter 57. Id. ¶¶ 57-62.

 

[swinokur]

Innocent until proven guilty

 

[Mister F]

Can plaintiffs be replaced? Cause such a continuing distraction doesn’t really seem like it’s useful.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[swinokur]

They have plenty of plaintiffs without Andy. His partner is also a plaintiff as are several employees

IMO he should not be dropped unless convicted

 

[dblas]

It just so happens that Andrew Raymond, the owner of Engage Armament named in the recent shooting incident, is one of the Plaintiffs in the lawsuit against this MoCo Law:

From Page 7 of MSI's filed Memorandum document:

Plaintiffs Andrew Raymond and Carlos Rabanales are co-owners of Engage and both work at and commute to Engage on a daily basis. Both individuals have wear and carry permits issued by the Maryland State Police and have in the past and intend to in the future possessed and transported firearms at or within 100 yards of the locations in which such activities are now banned by Chapter 57. Id. ¶¶ 57-62.

And...What's your point?

Even as charged, he can still be a plantiff.