SB1 (2023) - Criminal Law - Wearing, Carrying, or Transporting Firearms - Restrictions (Gun Safety Act of 2023)

[swinokur]

Plaintiffs do not consent for 21+day extension on PI

Plaintiffs do not consent to a 21-day extension of time to file a reply to the PI motion. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.536814/gov.uscourts.mdd.536814.26.0.pdf

 

[swinokur]

So we get June off

 

[Apd09]

Because those cases are months older than our case, that is what, less than 2 weeks old?

And the SCOTUS cases were because the district court judges decided fairly expeditiously and then the appeals courts made it clear they were going to sit on emergency relief for months and months without even bothering to come up with a briefing schedule.

My bad, I was thinking this was the Assault Weapon ban thread. Yeah totally makes sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Phoenix_1295]

State has asked for a 21 day extension to respond to Novoty v. Moore

Funny, I swore the AG et al did their research before it was passed?

They had plenty of notice to prep. Mark told them during his testimony that there would be a lawsuit. They should have paid closer attention.

 

[Bertfish]

They had plenty of notice to prep. Mark told them during his testimony that there would be a lawsuit. They should have paid closer attention.

They didn't give a shit then and don't now

 

[swinokur]

All filings here

Novotny v. Moore - Challenge to 2023 SB 1

9/30/2023On behalf of our members and in partnership with the Second Amendment Foundation and Firearms Policy Coalition, Maryland Shall Issue and three individual plaintiffs are challenging unconstitutional aspects of SB 1, the so-called “Gun Safety Act of 2023” in the US District Court for the...

www.marylandshallissue.org

 

[pcfixer]

What does the phrase justice is blind mean?

• The phrase “justice is blind” means that in a court of law, a person is tried on facts and evidence. Judges, juries, and law enforcement professionals aren’t supposed to pick favorites or rule for whomever they like the most. Instead, they have to take an unbiased approach and make an impartial decision with the information available to them.

Should justice be blind, or deaf and Dumb?

• warned about its limitations. After all, although justice should be blind, it shouldn't be deaf and extremely dumb as well. Sean Carter is a lawyer, public speaker, and the author of "If It Does Not Fit, Must - Your Humorous Guide to the Law".

 

[rbird7282]

State has asked for a 21 day extension to respond to Novoty v. Moore

Funny, I swore the AG et al did their research before it was passed?

These continuous extension are bullsh*t. Why have them if they’re always granted? Both sides get your sh*t together and be prepared to present your argument on the original date.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lazarus]

My bad, I was thinking this was the Assault Weapon ban thread. Yeah totally makes sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh, yeah, on that one, it feels like it is getting close to time to poke SCOTUS. That said, the original case took more than a year. So, unfortunately I won't be surprised if we don't hear a thing until Fall or Winter. The others are more emergent cases with PIs requested rather than final decisions. The district court judges likely won't even issue final rulings for months more. As this one is not a PI, but final decision from the appeals court, I suspect after a year, that is the time to poke.

 

[Apd09]

Oh, yeah, on that one, it feels like it is getting close to time to poke SCOTUS. That said, the original case took more than a year. So, unfortunately I won't be surprised if we don't hear a thing until Fall or Winter. The others are more emergent cases with PIs requested rather than final decisions. The district court judges likely won't even issue final rulings for months more. As this one is not a PI, but final decision from the appeals court, I suspect after a year, that is the time to poke.

I agree, however when you have clear direction on a GVR (or so it seems since courts are still saying it’s not clear), asked for briefs, had oral arguments, it should seem the writing is on the wall. However every state of this ilk, CA, NY, IL , NJ, CT, MD etc… with an assault weapons ban is trying to slow walk in hopes one state can find the magic law that allows them to stand. my bad on the tangent here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dblas]

That's what discovery is for.

No, it really isn't.

There could very well be inculpatory emails or text messages that establish intent.

There could be, but you need to establish you have a case in order to get to discovery and find the e-mails.

It's an emotional issue for the Antis; one or more of them probably created a record establishing intent. The overt act was creating and editing the draft bill.

Again, good luck providing enough of an argument to move a case along to the point of discovery to find that record, and prove the "overt act".

And yes, it would be a novel, risky legal action. But it would enable us to go on the offensive instead of once again just responding to the other side's activities, and might have a deterrent effect.

Good luck finding any judge even a Trump appointee, that would grant the argument and the case.

 

[lazarus]

No, it really isn't.


There could be, but you need to establish you have a case in order to get to discovery and find the e-mails.


Again, good luck providing enough of an argument to move a case along to the point of discovery to find that record, and prove the "overt act".


Good luck finding any judge even a Trump appointee, that would grant the argument and the case.

And to add, because of things like the speech and debate clause, you have to establish real clear evidence to convince a judge. Some public statements are unlikely to be enough. You'd already need to be in possession of sufficient evidence that would likely tip the scales already and a subpoena would simply be about confirming things.

As much as some politician's decry witch hunts, judges, and even prosecutors, are pretty loathe to go after legislators for anything without very clear evidence of wrong doing in hand. And I mean ANYTHING. Whether it is corruption in office, misuse of election funds, drunk driving, fraud, perjury, murder. Which is why I usually raise eyebrows when there is any investigation, let alone an indictment. Because in the vast majority of cases (there are ALWAYS exceptions) likely that prosecutor likely has way more evidence against that legislator than they would with your typical citizen.

They don't like blow back either. Some of them are elected officials and getting egg on their face isn't a great way to get re-elected. Even "virtue signaling" prosecutions. Because unsuccessful ones make the base madder than no prosecution at all in most cases. Political witch hunts are something political committees tend to do, like house and senate committees, not prosecutors (and judges almost never entertain it).

 

[scottyfz6]

If I was Mark I would reply quoting.

12. Plaintiff’s challenge to Maryland’s concealed-carry restrictions present important issues of public policy. Decisions about whether to enjoin laws designed to protect public safety and reduce gun violence should not be made until the State has had adequate time to provide fully developed and thorough briefing on the question

And slap them down using Thomas' words about there not being ANY interest balancing and only being about THT.

 

[dblas]

Like many of the sheep persuasion, they are doing it because they are told to. Like sheep and lemmngs, they don't know why.

The difference between sheep and lemmings...The lemmings were chased off the cliff by Walt Disney (Disney filming staff, true story), they didn't follow each other like sheep do.

 

[pcfixer]

This is an indication of what they will use against "us" in a court of law.

https://www.marylandattorneygeneral.gov/press/2023/013123.pdf

Also...https://www.marylandattorneygeneral.gov/news%20documents/013123_Christian_v_Nigrelli.pdf

 

[thomfantomas]

This is an indication of what they will use against "us" in a court of law.

https://www.marylandattorneygeneral.gov/press/2023/013123.pdf

Also...https://www.marylandattorneygeneral.gov/news%20documents/013123_Christian_v_Nigrelli.pdf

It was never a f*cking issue when it was "may issue" now they scream "public safety".

 

[Bob A]

It was never a f*cking issue when it was "may issue" now they scream "public safety".

Too many armed peasants.

Register your pitchforks, and keep them on the plantation.

 

[308Scout]

This is an indication of what they will use against "us" in a court of law.

https://www.marylandattorneygeneral.gov/press/2023/013123.pdf

Also...https://www.marylandattorneygeneral.gov/news%20documents/013123_Christian_v_Nigrelli.pdf

and it's largely just more "interest balancing":

“The ability for states to enact reasonable gun safety laws enables them to fulfill a traditional regulatory role of protecting their residents,” said Attorney General Brown. “Gun violence is an epidemic. States have a Constitutional right to restrict who may possess firearms, and where those firearms may be carried, in the interest of public safety.”

 

[6-Pack]

It was never a f*cking issue when it was "may issue" now they scream "public safety".

What a useless waste of taxpayer resources

 

[Sunrise]

Just got this text:

MD Governor Wes Moore here.

Literally moments after I signed the Gun Safety Act of 2023 to keep guns out of our schools, government buildings, and health care facilities – the NRA and a gun dealer sued our state.

If you're outraged by this attack, please pitch in before midnight to show that Maryland isn't afraid of the NRA (and to help hit our end-of-month fundraising goal).

DONATE: ActBlue Link

By Authority: Wes Moore for Maryland, Mary Tydings, Treasurer
Text STOP to quit

Go all-in Wes. Please.