SAF SUES IN MARYLAND OVER HANDGUN PERMIT DENIAL UPDATED 3-5-12

[Mr H]

Here's the current docket and the States Motion:



Note that the Motion is in draft form, pending #55 motion to exceed length. Also notice that Gura has until next Tuesday, July 31, to file a response.

"Exceed length"... not familiar with that.

Is that a request for extension of time to file something???

 

[MJD438]

And here we have the "precrime" argument again:

Additionally, in the absence of a good-and-substantial-reason requirement, Maryland would likely be required to issue permits to individuals who will use their handguns to commit crimes. Although the primary factor used to disqualify individuals from receiving a permit in “shall-issue” jurisdictions is whether they have a past felony conviction, studies have found that fewer than half of adults arrested for criminal homicide have prior felony convictions. (J.A. 78-79 (Cook).) The presence or absence of prior felony convictions therefore does not reliably predict who is likely to use a handgun for criminal activity, making that factor inadequate, on its own, for effective permitting. (J.A. 128 (Johnson).) Indeed, one group that has tracked public reports of killings committed by handgun permit holders since May 2007 has identified 448 people killed by holders of concealed carry permits/licenses, including 276 non-suicide, intentional killings. See Violence Policy Center, TOTAL PEOPLE KILLED BY CONCEALED HANDGUN PERMIT HOLDERS (2012), available at http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/ccwtotalkilled.pdf (last visited July 25, 2012).

And the "it will cost us too much money" argument that Legg soundly rebuffed:

Moreover, failure to grant a stay will impose significant and immediate administrative burdens on the State and on individuals who would qualify for a Permit under current law.13 MSP resources for processing permits are already strained, and would become much more so if a large number of new permit applications need to be processed, leading to potential delays that would particularly affect those who, under existing law, have a demonstrable reason to wear and carry a handgun in public. (Supp. App. 235-36). Moreover, if a stay is not entered and Defendants ultimately prevail, MSP would be obligated to revoke the permits of all individuals who decline to, or who cannot, provide evidence of a good and substantial reason during the pendency of the appeal. (Supp. App. 231.) Although MSP would attempt to lessen the harmful impact of this scenario, it will inevitably result in a significant administrative burden and delays. (Supp. App. 231-35.)

And, definitively included, the infamous "long gun carry" argument:

Nor does Maryland’s good-and-substantial-reason requirement burden any individual’s wear and carry of long guns.

To me, this reads like a minimalist re-hash of the arguments they made, and failed with, in front of Judge Legg. Perhaps one of our legal eagles can say whether they feel that this meets the "abuse of discretion" standard?

 

[hooligan82]

And here we have the "precrime" argument again:


And the "it will cost us too much money" argument that Legg soundly rebuffed:


And, definitively included, the infamous "long gun carry" argument:


To me, this reads like a minimalist re-hash of the arguments they made, and failed with, in front of Judge Legg. Perhaps one of our legal eagles can say whether they feel that this meets the "abuse of discretion" standard?

Is it just me, or is this a problem with their source?

The following vignettes describe the circumstances for all killings (private citizen, law
enforcement, mass shootings, murder-suicide) not ruled self-defense by private individuals
legally allowed to carry concealed handguns. The descriptions include the current, known status
of any charges filed against the concealed carry killer as reported by news sources as well as
noting instances where the perpetrator committed suicide.

 

[NattyBoh]

Is this the start of the end for us again? I dont understand the legal verbage (sp?)

 

[Al Norris]

I just finished a brief read of the Motion.

This is nothing more than a condensed version of their merits brief (which was a condensed version of their briefs at district) combined with their brief at district to continue the stay, all of which Judge Legg found unpersuasive. They have made no new arguments that undercuts Judge Leggs decisions, let alone any argument that Judge Legg abused his discretion in dissolving the stay at district.

I expect the Motions Panel to find the same.

ETA: Exceeding the length means that the 38 page motion is longer than the court normally allows.

 

[lx1x]

To me, this reads like a minimalist re-hash of the arguments they made, and failed with, in front of Judge Legg. Perhaps one of our legal eagles can say whether they feel that this meets the "abuse of discretion" standard?

seem to me also when i skimmed through it.. so its very good chance they get denied again..

 

[Mr H]

seem to me also when i skimmed through it.. so its very good chance they get denied again..

Hail Mary, but-but-but, stalling tactic.

Or, just being thorough... like claiming the pitch hit you when you're down by 8.

 

[NattyBoh]

seem to me also when i skimmed through it.. so its very good chance they get denied again..

Okay so if this ( by this I mean what they just proposed again ) gets thrown out again does that mean were golden?

 

[MJD438]

Okay so if this ( by this I mean what they just proposed again ) gets thrown out again does that mean were golden?

If CA4 does not find merit, it means that the state will have to issue without considering G&S for the duration of the appeal process at CA4.

 

[lx1x]

If CA4 does not find merit, it means that the state will have to issue without considering G&S for the duration of the appeal process at CA4.

[crossing fingers and toes]

 

[MJD438]

IANAL, so my posts are just my layman's interpretation based on comments made by others on here that are lawyers.

 

[NattyBoh]

If CA4 does not find merit, it means that the state will have to issue without considering G&S for the duration of the appeal process at CA4.

Okay thats what I was wondering, thanks. And the dead line is Aug 7th right? Say this: We get the permits granted and were carrying for 6 mths after August ( this is just hypothetical ) Can they ( they being MD ) revoke the permits, or do they need to do this whole process over again?

 

[Mr H]

Okay thats what I was wondering, thanks. And the dead line is Aug 7th right? Say this: We get the permits granted and were carrying for 6 mths after August ( this is just hypothetical ) Can they ( they being MD ) revoke the permits, or do they need to do this whole process over again?

This is one of the big questions.

Sadly, I think the answer may float on the political winds.

 

[hooligan82]

Okay thats what I was wondering, thanks. And the dead line is Aug 7th right? Say this: We get the permits granted and were carrying for 6 mths after August ( this is just hypothetical ) Can they ( they being MD ) revoke the permits, or do they need to do this whole process over again?

If the 4th circuit, or supreme court overturn the ruling Md. law is the way it was before the ruling. I'm fairly certain about this. Someone correct me if I'm leaving anything out, or this is incorrect.

 

[Mr H]

If the 4th circuit, or supreme court overturn the ruling Md. law is the way it was before the ruling. I'm fairly certain about this. Someone correct me if I'm leaving anything out, or this is incorrect.

Well, if CA4 overturns District, SAF/Woollard can request SCOTUS review. If SCOTUS declines, then yes... back to business as usual.

If CA4 upholds District, Maryland can request SCOTUS review. If SCOTUS declines, then G&S is dead, and the world changes.

There's no guarantee SCOTUS will take it, in either situation.

 

[Inigoes]

If the 4th circuit, or supreme court overturn the ruling Md. law is the way it was before the ruling. I'm fairly certain about this. Someone correct me if I'm leaving anything out, or this is incorrect.

Aug 7 still stands until the CA4 decides that Judge Legg was out of bounds.

 

[NattyBoh]

Okay but they have basically until the 7th to say yay or nay. They we dont need G&S anymore, so we can apply after the 7th. If the state of MD is still hating then they can re-apply for try and over throw again?

 

[lx1x]

Okay but they have basically until the 7th to say yay or nay. They we dont need G&S anymore, so we can apply after the 7th. If the state of MD is still hating then they can re-apply for try and over throw again?

if they have good arguments.. but seems like they are stuck to same ol' line.. blood in the streets.

 

[hooligan82]

Okay but they have basically until the 7th to say yay or nay. They we dont need G&S anymore, so we can apply after the 7th. If the state of MD is still hating then they can re-apply for try and over throw again?

The 7th is the end of the stay put in place by Judge Legg. The rest of the proceedings are still undecided.

 

[NattyBoh]

thx all for spelling it out for me