NY ordered to answer to SCOTUS

[Kharn]

2CA wil hear all four cases on 20 March 2023.

Antonyuk, Hardaway, Christian, and Gazzola

 

[whistlersmother]

2CA wil hear all four cases on 20 March 2023.

Antonyuk, Hardaway, Christian, and Gazzola

And there's the definition if "reasonable time".

Too bad a civil right has to wait for another 2 months before even being heard.

 

[Kharn]

And there's the definition if "reasonable time".

Too bad a civil right has to wait for another 2 months before even being heard.

I don't believe the cases are all fully briefed, 30 days each would be understandable.

I expected 90 days for 2CA to publish a written reasoning for the stay without argument, I'm rather surprised it's that fast.

 

[Bertfish]

And there's the definition if "reasonable time".

Too bad a civil right has to wait for another 2 months before even being heard.

If this was a 1A case there would be rioting

 

[swinokur]

2CA wil hear all four cases on 20 March 2023.

Antonyuk, Hardaway, Christian, and Gazzola

Link?

 

[Kharn]

 

[swinokur]

Thank you

 

[Abuck]

It’s such a bunch of BS. From SCOTUS;

“The District Court found, in a thor- ough opinion, that the applicants were likely to succeed on a number of their claims, and it issued a preliminary in- junction as to twelve provisions of the challenged law. With one exception, the Second Circuit issued a stay of the in- junction in full, and in doing so did not provide any expla- nation for its ruling.”

So even though the case looks very winnable, and even though the 2nd Circuit Court couldn’t be be bothered countering any of the provisions in the case to justify their stay, they get to continue violating a constitutional right, and put normally law abiding citizens in serious legal jeopardy. Sorry, that sucks.
Months to hear the case, months to come out with a decision. Then probably months for more appeals. I can’t wait to see what SCOTUS does after they continue to F this up. But wait we all must.

Thanks for the info.

 

[jcutonilli]

And there's the definition if "reasonable time".

Too bad a civil right has to wait for another 2 months before even being heard.

Things appear to have accelerated due to SCOTUS.

In the FPC case (22-2987), the 2CA set an "expedited" briefing schedule back in Dec with the Appellants reply brief due on 22 March

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/6597/attachments/original/1670951628/Christian_v_Nigrelli_Scheduling_Order.pdf?1670951628

The oral arguments for these combined cases is now being heard on 20 March so things have accelerated even faster. There is a minimum of 7 days between the reply brief and oral arguments. Several months of time typically elapse between the reply brief and oral arguments.

The Antonyuk case is farther ahead. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66674530/antonyuk-v-hochul/
There were two initial briefs has been filed by the defendants in that case.

#95 in Antonyuk v. Hochul (2d Cir., 22-2908) – CourtListener.com

BRIEF, on behalf of Appellant Matthew J. Doran and Steven A. Nigrelli in 22-2908, FILED. Service date 01/09/2023 by CM/ECF.[3449286] [22-2908, 22-2972] [Entered: 01/09/2023 07:45 PM]

www.courtlistener.com

#90 in Antonyuk v. Hochul (2d Cir., 22-2908) – CourtListener.com

BRIEF, on behalf of Appellant Joseph Cecile in 22-2908, 22-2972, FILED. Service date 01/09/2023 by CM/ECF.[3448868] [22-2908, 22-2972] [Entered: 01/09/2023 12:59 PM]

www.courtlistener.com

 

[Blacksmith101]

Things appear to have accelerated due to SCOTUS.

In the FPC case (22-2987), the 2CA set an "expedited" briefing schedule back in Dec with the Appellants reply brief due on 22 March

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/6597/attachments/original/1670951628/Christian_v_Nigrelli_Scheduling_Order.pdf?1670951628

The oral arguments for these combined cases is now being heard on 20 March so things have accelerated even faster. There is a minimum of 7 days between the reply brief and oral arguments. Several months of time typically elapse between the reply brief and oral arguments.

The Antonyuk case is farther ahead. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66674530/antonyuk-v-hochul/
There were two initial briefs has been filed by the defendants in that case.

#95 in Antonyuk v. Hochul (2d Cir., 22-2908) – CourtListener.com

BRIEF, on behalf of Appellant Matthew J. Doran and Steven A. Nigrelli in 22-2908, FILED. Service date 01/09/2023 by CM/ECF.[3449286] [22-2908, 22-2972] [Entered: 01/09/2023 07:45 PM]

www.courtlistener.com

#90 in Antonyuk v. Hochul (2d Cir., 22-2908) – CourtListener.com

BRIEF, on behalf of Appellant Joseph Cecile in 22-2908, 22-2972, FILED. Service date 01/09/2023 by CM/ECF.[3448868] [22-2908, 22-2972] [Entered: 01/09/2023 12:59 PM]

www.courtlistener.com

Since it appears that the 2nd Circuit got the message Justices' Scalia and Thomas sent it is my guess that at least two of the Circuit Court judges will decide they don't want to commit judicial suicide and so at least most of the New York new infringement law will be overturned. Probably the decision will include some weaselly words like the defendants did not include enough historical references or some such thing to leave the door ajar for the next case.

Assuming New York loses I also anticipate that the state will not appeal to the Supreme Court because they know they would lose and in doing so make the ruling apply nationwide. So they will bite the bullet and allow the ruling only be effective in the 2nd Circuit. Therefore each circuit will have to be fought individually.

 

[motorcoachdoug]

Since it appears that the 2nd Circuit got the message Justices' Scalia and Thomas sent it is my guess that at least two of the Circuit Court judges will decide they don't want to commit judicial suicide and so at least most of the New York new infringement law will be overturned. Probably the decision will include some weaselly words like the defendants did not include enough historical references or some such thing to leave the door ajar for the next case.

Assuming New York loses I also anticipate that the state will not appeal to the Supreme Court because they know they would lose and in doing so make the ruling apply nationwide. So they will bite the bullet and allow the ruling only be effective in the 2nd Circuit. Therefore each circuit will have to be fought individually.

Never assume anything with New York as their anti 2A leader wants to take on SCOTUS and she might be stupid enough to tell the AG if they lose at 2CA to send that appeal to SCOTUS thus having a nationwide effect possibly. What do they say when you assume something????

 

[Boxcab]

Yep. NY thinks they still have the high ground.

I encourage them to reach for that golden ring with all they can muster!

Lean out and reach...


further...





further...







f u r t h e r...



.




Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk

 

[pcfixer]

REALLY? In the FPC case (22-2987), the 2CA set an "expedited" briefing schedule

SMH Not expedited process!

January 23, 2023; Appellees’ opposition brief is due March 6, 2023; any reply brief must be filed by March 22, 2023

• 68 days
• ... or 9 weeks & 5 days
• ... or 2 months & 9 days

It's a JOKE!

 

[Abuck]

View attachment 396338
View attachment 396339

2 weeks (actually 13 days) to see more of how this ongoing dance goes. The music has gotten better, but still waiting to see the bully taken out to the woodshed and embarrassed.

I don’t think SCOTUS will be very happy if they get another bite of the apple. Hopefully the next spanking makes the last one seem like a few love taps. As mentioned above, NY probably want to avoid that. But as seen in the MD hearing today, stupidity knows no limits.

 

[Woodnickel]

2 weeks (actually 13 days) to see more of how this ongoing dance goes. The music has gotten better, but still waiting to see the bully taken out to the woodshed and embarrassed.

I don’t think SCOTUS will be very happy if they get another bite of the apple. Hopefully the next spanking makes the last one seem like a few love taps. As mentioned above, NY probably want to avoid that. But as seen in the MD hearing today, stupidity knows no limits.

Does anyone have a link to listen to this live?

 

[BartExp]

Does anyone have a link to listen to this live?

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx Try this. Whoops - Wrong Court PLEASE IGNORE

 

[krucam]

Does anyone have a link to listen to this live?

On YouTube perhaps. I can’t listen right now.

 

[krucam]

 

[delaware_export]

Caught part of the guns/churches by worshippers (next is clergy, starting next)

i predict this will be found in favor of state. At least one judge used the pro2a lawyers time to make the states arguments.

this is the resistance. And Thomas should have been much more blunt. Same problem scalia had with vague wording.

imho, if the state doesn’t provide security, and accept liability when it fails (forfeiting castle rock, immunity) then the place in question ain’t sensitive.

the states list would get real short real fast.

 

[hdatontodo]

I caught a small segment on NY FFL state-required inventory reconciliation and some other topics. The justice asked, "What is your best example of a NY requirement that goes against federal law." She seemed to hem and haw and refer generally to her filing divided into sections A, B, and C.

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk