Nichols v. Brown - New CA Open-Carry Civil Rights Lawsuit Filed

[JC92]

SCOTUS RULE 10 - The Court's own internal guidance on how it decides to grant Cert. It is not binding. SCOTUS can grant Cert to whatever case garners four (4) votes.

 

[California Right To Carry]

SCOTUS Rule 10?

As you can see, there are no grounds for SCOTUS to grant the cert petition. Not even under the rarely granted cases where there was a mistake of fact or law.

Rule 10. Considerations Governing Review on Writ of Certiorari
Review on a writ of certiorari is not a matter of right, but of judicial discretion. A petition for a writ of certiorari will be granted only for compelling reasons. The following, although neither controlling nor fully measuring the Court's discretion, indicate the character of the reasons the Court considers:

(a) a United States court of appeals has entered a decision in conflict with the decision of another United States court of appeals on the same important matter; has decided an important federal question in a way that conflicts with a decision by a state court of last resort; or has so far departed from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings, or sanctioned such a departure by a lower court, as to call for an exercise of this Court's supervisory power;
(b) a state court of last resort has decided an important federal question in a way that conflicts with the decision of another state court of last resort or of a United States court of appeals;
(c) a state court or a United States court of appeals has decided an important question of federal law that has not been, but should be, settled by this Court, or has decided an important federal question in a way that conflicts with relevant decisions of this Court.
A petition for a writ of certiorari is rarely granted when the asserted error consists of erroneous factual findings or the misapplication of a properly stated rule of law.

 

[California Right To Carry]

SCOTUS RULE 10 - The Court's own internal guidance on how it decides to grant Cert. It is not binding. SCOTUS can grant Cert to whatever case garners four (4) votes.

Thanks for the news flash. Now enlighten us with the names of the four justices who are going to grant the Peruta cert petition and the names of the five justices who are going to discover a right to concealed carry under the Second Amendment which has never existed.

 

[Kharn]

Which five would do it for your case?

 

[California Right To Carry]

Which five would do it for your case?

Thomas
Alito
Roberts
Kennedy
Scalia's replacement

And given that the 1967 ban on Loaded Open Carry was enacted out of racial animus as was California's 1923 "licensing scheme" and the two more recently enacted bans on Unloaded Open Carry were enacted to "close the loophole" in the 1967 ban, the remaining four justices are unlikely to side with the state of California.

California's Unloaded Open Carry bans exempt unloaded antiques. Banning modern arms conflicts with Heller and resulted in a unanimous decision by SCOTUS in the Caetano case.

Thanks for playing.

 

[Kharn]

I dunno, for some reason I just get the feeling Paul Clement's briefs and O'Scannlain's panel opinion will have a bit more sway for the same five people.

 

[California Right To Carry]

I dunno, for some reason I just get the feeling Paul Clement's briefs and O'Scannlain's panel opinion will have a bit more sway for the same five people.

Clement and Gura sure have filed a lot of cert petitions between them and all of them have been denied.

O'Scannlain's panel opinion is irrelevant to the Peruta cert petition. The opinion which will be attached to the Peruta (and possibly Richards) cert petition will be the en banc panel decision of which O'Scannlain was not a member.

If you are going to cast dispersion, you should first learn how things work.

 

[Kharn]

The court won't just read the en banc opinion, they'll even read the district court's. The en banc dissents and the panel opinion would guide the bulk of the majority opinion if they were to reverse.

How many quills do you have, again?

 

[Brooklyn]

It doesn't help that the friendly venues tend to have nothing of relevance to challenge. You can't challenge a carry ban where there isn't one.


(Sent with Tapatalk, so apologies for the lackluster formatting)

Yes you can... But it's risky.. a challenge to a proforma shall issue... Still criminalies protected conduct and may not pass SS. For example a permit that requires nothing but a background check.. serves no purpose unless the issuing agency is in fact pulling permits if the status changes.

A challenge to that law would be that no permit should be required to carry unless you required to prove that you are not prohibited...and permits without periodically checking NICS can not do that. Thus they cannot serve the states interests at all.

Then part 2 of the challenge is that no such permitting system, if mandated, is narrowly tailored,and requires the waiver if 4th A to excerise the 2nd.


The risk is that you will lose and make rational basis the defacto standard of review.


It's not time for such a hail Mary play.

Yet.

 

[jcutonilli]

Clement and Gura sure have filed a lot of cert petitions between them and all of them have been denied.

I guess you have not heard of Heller or McDonald. Both were filed by Gura. SCOTUS accepted both petitions.

 

[California Right To Carry]

I guess you have not heard of Heller or McDonald. Both were filed by Gura. SCOTUS accepted both petitions.

You mean Heller, which clearly stated that concealed carry is not a right and McDonald which applied the Second Amendment right defined in Heller against the states?

Peruta is yet another concealed carry appeal. The justices won't care if the cert petition is delivered with hookers and blow. The cert petition is dead on arrival.

 

[California Right To Carry]

The court won't just read the en banc opinion, they'll even read the district court's. The en banc dissents and the panel opinion would guide the bulk of the majority opinion if they were to reverse.

How many quills do you have, again?

Here is a link to the SCOTUS rules. Either you have never read them or, if you did, you did not understand them.

Either way, the link is for the benefit of others who have an I.Q. north of double digits.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/ctrules/2013RulesoftheCourt.pdf

 

[jcutonilli]

You mean Heller, which clearly stated that concealed carry is not a right and McDonald which applied the Second Amendment right defined in Heller against the states?

Peruta is yet another concealed carry appeal. The justices won't care if the cert petition is delivered with hookers and blow. The cert petition is dead on arrival.

I mean the Heller and McDonald cases, which Gura petitioned, and SCOTUS accepted. Since you can't seem to even understand Gura was the lawyer, it is not surprising you don't know what it actually said. While it is true that many courts rejected a concealed carry argument, the rational had to do with it being considered criminal behavior. The 9th circuit confirmed this in their first ruling. In today's society it is not considered criminal behavior and is protected by 2A.

Gura failed to argue this in the en banc. He lost the en banc hearing because of this. SCOTUS is not likely to grant the petition because of this.

 

[Kharn]

I mean the Heller and McDonald cases, which Gura petitioned, and SCOTUS accepted. Since you can't seem to even understand Gura was the lawyer, it is not surprising you don't know what it actually said. While it is true that many courts rejected a concealed carry argument, the rational had to do with it being considered criminal behavior. The 9th circuit confirmed this in their first ruling. In today's society it is not considered criminal behavior and is protected by 2A.

Gura failed to argue this in the en banc. He lost the en banc hearing because of this. SCOTUS is not likely to grant the petition because of this.

Gura isn't part of Peruta, Clement has been the counsel of record since reaching the 9th.

 

[jcutonilli]

Gura isn't part of Peruta, Clement has been the counsel of record since reaching the 9th.

Gura was part of the en banc. The 9CA en banc heard Peruta and Richards together and released a combined opinion covering both cases. This opinion is colloquially known as Peruta. Clement argued for Peruta and Gura argued for Richards. To be fair Clement did not argue the basis for the historic ban on concealed carry either (due to criminality) nor how it has changed in present times.

 

[esqappellate]

Clement and Gura sure have filed a lot of cert petitions between them and all of them have been denied.

O'Scannlain's panel opinion is irrelevant to the Peruta cert petition. The opinion which will be attached to the Peruta (and possibly Richards) cert petition will be the en banc panel decision of which O'Scannlain was not a member.

If you are going to cast dispersion, you should first learn how things work.

Well, not quite correct. The petition for cert will have *both* the en banc opinion and the panel opinion attached. Been there. And the panel opinion is not irrelevant, as the petition will most certainly rely on it.

 

[California Right To Carry]

Well, not quite correct. The petition for cert will have *both* the en banc opinion and the panel opinion attached. Been there. And the panel opinion is not irrelevant, as the petition will most certainly rely on it.

The court can dig through every doghouse of records it wants to but we both know that it is the eleven judge en banc panel decision which is being appealed and not the vacated three judge panel decision and not the district court decision.

And given that the en banc panel decision in Peruta v. San Diego/Richards v. Prieto does not create a split with any Federal appellate decision or state high court decision, and certainly doesn't conflict with any US Supreme Court decision, it will meet with the same fate as every other concealed carry cert petition.

CERT DENIED.

I would be interested in reading one of your "been there done that" cert petitions where you attached both the en banc decision and the three judge panel decision to your cert petition.

Feel free to post your cert petition here for everyone to read.

 

[esqappellate]

The court can dig through every doghouse of records it wants to but we both know that it is the eleven judge en banc panel decision which is being appealed and not the vacated three judge panel decision and not the district court decision.

And given that the en banc panel decision in Peruta v. San Diego/Richards v. Prieto does not create a split with any Federal appellate decision or state high court decision, and certainly doesn't conflict with any US Supreme Court decision, it will meet with the same fate as every other concealed carry cert petition.

CERT DENIED.

I would be interested in reading one of your "been there done that" cert petitions where you attached both the en banc decision and the three judge panel decision to your cert petition.

Feel free to post your cert petition here for everyone to read.

I worked with the Office of the Solicitor General of the United States (that's the Department of Justice) on an every day basis for 33 years (I retired a month ago). *Every* petition for cert. filed by the United States follows this practice. Honestly, this is elementary. It is standard practice in filing a cert petition to reprint and attach the court of appeals decision *and* the district court decision in the Appendix. Everyone does that, not just the SG's office. I suggest you read Rule 14 of the Court's rules. Subsection (i) states that the petition Appendix shall contain "the opinions, order, findings of fact, and conclusions of law, whether written or orally given and transcribed, entered in conjunction with the judgment sought to be reviewed." The rule then goes on to list other materials that must be included, and adds at the end "any other material the petitioner believes essential to understand the issue." If you doubt any of this, I suggest that you go to Scotusblog and download and review any non-pro se petition for cert. (you will find them under "merits cases") and take a look for yourself. Everyone single one will have the district court opinion (if a federal case and not a direct CA review case). If you search far enough back (the "merits cases" link goes back years), I am certain that you will find cases in which cert was granted from an en banc decision. If you look at those cert petitions will will invariably find that the panel decision is in the appendix to the cert petition (again assuming that it is not pro se).

As to the merits of whether a petition might be granted in Peruta, you may well be right that the petition will be denied. To some extent, that may well depend on who the President Elect nominates to the Court. Recall that it takes only 4 to grant a petition but it takes 5 to win. I can well imagine that if a nomination is before the Senate, the Court might well be inclined to hold a petition in abeyance until there is confirmation. (That's called "relisting"). Clement is an ex SG. I worked with his Office (and with him) when he was SG. He is part of the very tiny class of the elite SCT bar. He knows the ropes as well or better than anyone.

 

[Haides]

The court can dig through every doghouse of records it wants to but we both know that it is the eleven judge en banc panel decision which is being appealed and not the vacated three judge panel decision and not the district court decision.

And given that the en banc panel decision in Peruta v. San Diego/Richards v. Prieto does not create a split with any Federal appellate decision or state high court decision, and certainly doesn't conflict with any US Supreme Court decision, it will meet with the same fate as every other concealed carry cert petition.

CERT DENIED.

I would be interested in reading one of your "been there done that" cert petitions where you attached both the en banc decision and the three judge panel decision to your cert petition.

Feel free to post your cert petition here for everyone to read.

You could sure stand to be a little less condescending, especially for someone with single-digit post count who's already been banned once.

 

[swinokur]

Go look on http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/forum.php for more condescending posts.