SAF files for cert in Drake (NJ may-issue)

[danb]

Texas is not on the list either. Some of the red states are missing because they don't want SCOTUS to get involved in the license to carry issue.

 

[Kharn]

The clerk has updated the Drake docket to reflect an amicus from Gun Owners Foundation, et al. SCOTUSBlog hasn't picked it up yet, so they don't have the brief.

Ilya Shapiro discusses his amicus at Cato

 

[ryan_j]

Texas is not on the list either. Some of the red states are missing because they don't want SCOTUS to get involved in the license to carry issue.

Texas is lame for gun rights anyway. They ban open carry and have been arresting people for open carrying rifles.

 

[ryan_j]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ght-against-new-jersey-concealed-weapons-law/

Wyoming and 18 others join in.

http://saf.org/?p=3035

SAF press release. Some members of Congress also sign.

 

[krucam]

http://saf.org/?p=3035

SAF press release. Some members of Congress also sign.

Thanks for the heads up. Linking from the above site sent me to a SAF Summary of the Drake Petition:
http://saf.org/?p=3013

There, are some links to the Amicus':

• The amicus brief filed by 19 states is available here.
• The amicus brief filed by 34 members of congress is available here.
• The amicus brief of the Cato Institute is available here.
• The amicus brief of the National Rifle Association is available here.
• The amicus brief of the Judicial Education Project is available here.
• The amicus brief of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence is available here.
• The amicus brief of the Gun Owners Foundation is available here.

7 Amici total. Time for some light reading...

 

[ryan_j]

So now that we have a split with CA9, I assume this greatly increases the chance for cert for Drake? Please, pretty please?

 

[fightinbluhen51]

Increases but, I am willing to be dollars to donuts that SCOTUS would prefer an appeal from California.

Jerry Brown and who's his AG? The dumber than Madigan?

 

[ryan_j]

What if they deny cert to Drake and CA chooses not to appeal?

 

[Patrick]

So now that we have a split with CA9, I assume this greatly increases the chance for cert for Drake? Please, pretty please?

Who knows. Nothing would surprise me anymore.

But Peruta specifically calls out a 2-3 split in the circuits on this question. They actually call it a direct circuit split, using those words.

They could wait for Peruta to make its way up. It invalidates a state law and overturns several state court decisions, while also creating a split. Drake didn't overturn anything and was in compliance with the NJ supreme court.

Generally the weight favors Peruta over Drake, but Peruta is going to go en banc and that will take more than a year, during which time it might as well have never been decided. And if the full court reverses, then it is really no different from Drake.

Obviously I am hopeful for Drake.

 

[yellowfin]

Jerry Brown and who's his AG? The dumber than Madigan?

Kamala Harris is CA's AG and she's an absolutely insane anti gun maniac.

 

[esqappellate]

Kamala Harris is CA's AG and she's an absolutely insane anti gun maniac.

Here she is:

 

[press1280]

But this doesn't specifically involve California, only San Diego. IIRC, both sides were basically pointing fingers at one another in District Court-San Diego saying OC should be allowed but CA law was at fault, and CA said San Diego's implementation of "good cause" was at fault.
I don't know what their budget is, but I'm not 100% convinced San Diego would seek cert(en banc definitely though).

 

[Kharn]

Here she is:

I'm not sure how much truth there is to it, but the CalGunners seem to think she's not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

 

[ryan_j]

But this doesn't specifically involve California, only San Diego.

That doesn't matter. The decision is binding throughout the 9th circuit which encompasses several states.

 

[swinokur]

SAF press release on Amicus briefs:

[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ATTORNEYS GENERAL FROM 19 STATES [/FONT][FONT=&quot]
FILE SCOTUS AMICUS BRIEF IN SAF CASE[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]BELLEVUE, WA – Attorneys general representing 19 states have signed onto an amicus curiae brief in the Second Amendment Foundation’s case of Drake v. Jerejian, asking U.S. Supreme Court determination whether the Second Amendment secures the right to carry handguns outside the home for self-defense.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] In their brief, written by Wyoming Attorney General Peter K. Michael, the attorneys general note, “significant splits of authority have developed in both the federal and state courts as they have tried to answer questions involving the right to keep and bear arms outside of the home.”[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] The case, which is joined by the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, also asks the high court to clarify the standard of review governing Second Amendment claims involving restrictions on the right of law-abiding adults to carry handguns outside the home. This case challenges New Jersey’s arbitrary requirement that carry permit applicants demonstrate a “justifiable need” to carry a handgun outside the home[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] Wyoming Attorney General Michael is joined by colleagues in Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota and West Virginia.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] “It is significant that so many attorneys general decided to sign on to this important brief,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “Their legal experience and understanding of this important constitutional and civil rights issue should carry great weight with the high court.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] SAF is represented by Virginia attorney Alan Gura, who has won both of the significant Supreme Court rulings on the Second Amendment, in 2008 and 2010. These victories have paved the way for numerous successful challenges of state and local limitations firearm civil rights. [/FONT]
​

[FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. [/FONT]

​

[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]< Please e-mail, distribute, and circulate to friends and family >[/FONT]​

Copyright © 2013 Second Amendment Foundation, All Rights Reserved.​

[FONT=&quot]Second Amendment Foundation
James Madison Building
12500 N.E. Tenth Place
Bellevue, WA 98005[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Voice: 425-454-7012
Toll Free: 800-426-4302
FAX: 425-451-3959
email: InformationRequest@saf.org[/FONT]​

​

 

[yellowfin]

Here she is:

I didn't say she was bad looking, but mentally she's like a carton of two dozen eggs hit a dozen times with a sledgehammer.

 

[ryan_j]

Here she is:

Well, she's somewhat of a looker, but so is Shannon Watts of Moms Demand Action.

 

[press1280]

That doesn't matter. The decision is binding throughout the 9th circuit which encompasses several states.

No but California isn't a party in the lawsuit, only San Diego. If San Diego just wants to quit, they can go ahead and California can't do anything about it.

 

[Gryphon]

Interesting and good point about San Diego's option to drop! BTW, she isn't such a looker! Besides, when you get a little more experience you learn that what's between their ears is more important than what's between their l*gs.

 

[Peaceful John]

Interesting and good point about San Diego's option to drop! BTW, she isn't such a looker! Besides, when you get a little more experience you learn that what's between their ears is more important than what's between their l*gs.

No, it's n-o-t-t-t-t!