Supreme Court remits MD assault weapons ban back to lower courts in light of Bruen vs. NY ruling

[Biggfoot44]

They will have to rule eventually

But in a vaguely practical sense , do they actually have to ? Are there any outer parameters, 1 year? 5 years? Until they retire ?

 

[dbledoc]

I was talking to my son who is currently clerking on one of the circuits (not the 4th). He says the 2A cases he was recently assigned to had their arguments presented 11 months ago.
Because it is a 3 judge panel they go back and forth and argue and edit opinions. He also states that the cases take much more intense research when compared to criminal or civil cases due to the complex case history.
So it is not surprising to him that this case is taking so long to get a judgement.

 

[Cool_Moo5e]

I was talking to my son who is currently clerking on one of the circuits (not the 4th). He says the 2A cases he was recently assigned to had their arguments presented 11 months ago.
Because it is a 3 judge panel they go back and forth and argue and edit opinions. He also states that the cases take much more intense research when compared to criminal or civil cases due to the complex case history.
So it is not surprising to him that this case is taking so long to get a judgement.

It's annoying but yes they all have to get their research done, then voice their opinion

 

[md_rick_o]

due to the complex case history.

The only reason it is "COMPLEX" is that they are trying to get around the shall not infringe.

 

[coinboy]

Do y'all really think that if the goverment wrote a law that said you had to take a test and present ID in order to practice your religion, protest, or vote that it would take this long? They would be expediting those opinions and fast tracking the research to stop the violations of the civil right.

I believe they don't agree with the decision they have to make and are delaying as long as possible. Other jurisdictions have done this faster.

My only hope at this point is that the two judges that I believe are going to side with us, write a 70 page well thought out opinion that rivals the 2nd Amendment Patron Saint Roger Benitez of SDoC.

 

[Mike1690]

I was talking to my son who is currently clerking on one of the circuits (not the 4th). He says the 2A cases he was recently assigned to had their arguments presented 11 months ago.
Because it is a 3 judge panel they go back and forth and argue and edit opinions. He also states that the cases take much more intense research when compared to criminal or civil cases due to the complex case history.
So it is not surprising to him that this case is taking so long to get a judgement.

Thanks for this. Interesting to see how these things work

 

[Ponder_MD]

Legislators pass unconstitutional laws with great expediency.

Citizens suffer while these laws languish in the courts due to all the research. I really feel that courts need to be more liberal about dispensing injunctions that pause these laws while all the back and forth plays out. Look at how quickly SB-1 passed into law the moment Heller was decided.

It appalls me that we fund our own opposition.

 

[fabsroman]

I was talking to my son who is currently clerking on one of the circuits (not the 4th). He says the 2A cases he was recently assigned to had their arguments presented 11 months ago.
Because it is a 3 judge panel they go back and forth and argue and edit opinions. He also states that the cases take much more intense research when compared to criminal or civil cases due to the complex case history.
So it is not surprising to him that this case is taking so long to get a judgement.

I guess you weren't able to talk him into medical school.

Being an attorney isn't too bad though. lol

 

[press1280]

But in a vaguely practical sense , do they actually have to ? Are there any outer parameters, 1 year? 5 years? Until they retire ?

There is no set deadline, however, if it drags on too long their Circuit Chief Judge may step in, or a motion can be made to SCOTUS.
After Heller a public carry case was filed (Palmer) which languished for YEARS in the District court with no movement whatsoever. A motion was made to Chief Justice Roberts, and although he denied the motion to compel, IIRC he did write a short statement, which if you read between the lines, did kind of put a little pressure on the court to hurry up, and the case was reassigned to another judge since the original judge was retiring.
In this case we're probably nowhere close to hitting those deadlines.

 

[Biggfoot44]

Having known that , at least in outline form , still begs my initial question .

We"ve had multiple knowledgeable Lawyers here inform us that Courts Really Don't Like these motions , unless they are really really Blatant , and none of our cases is close

The Referenced Palmer case above was Years , and didn't rate an actual Order , just a read between the lines informal hint .

So back at my question , for For Real action from higher court is it 3 years ? 5 years ? 12 month window before an announced Retirement ?

If a particular Judge keels over with a heart attack 2 years of foot dragging in , does the case have to be retried ? ( Seems almost a joke , but there are enough sitting judges in their 60's and 70's for actuary statistics to kick in ) .

 

[Apd09]

So back at my question , for For Real action from higher court is it 3 years ? 5 years ? 12 month window before an announced Retirement ?

I think the infuriating thing is that the SCOTUS can hear a case and then 7 months later issue a ruling. Now granted they prolly have a much lighter workload in terms of volume of cases, like 20 or so each term compared to the Circuit Courts, but they show the length of time it “should” take to decide a case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Blacksmith101]

I think the infuriating thing is that the SCOTUS can hear a case and then 7 months later issue a ruling. Now granted they prolly have a much lighter workload in terms of volume of cases, like 20 or so each term compared to the Circuit Courts, but they show the length of time it “should” take to decide a case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But the cases at the Supreme Court level are more complicated with many more volumes of data and submissions to be reviewed and checked.

Just read through all the Amicus Curiae Briefs in the Rahimi case as an example:
Link to Docket:

Docket for 22-915

 

[Bob A]

But the cases at the Supreme Court level are more complicated with many more volumes of data and submissions to be reviewed and checked.

Just read through all the Amicus Curiae Briefs in the Rahimi case as an example:
Link to Docket:

Docket for 22-915

FIFY. You gonna do lawyer, you must be picky.

 

[6-Pack]

I think the infuriating thing is that the SCOTUS can hear a case and then 7 months later issue a ruling. Now granted they prolly have a much lighter workload in terms of volume of cases, like 20 or so each term compared to the Circuit Courts, but they show the length of time it “should” take to decide a case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To be fair, they decide their own workload….

 

[Apd09]

Interesting take, our favorite verbose YouTube lawyer covering what he thinks is happening here and why there’s no ruling.

Believes Thacker ran to the entire 4th circuit and they’ve internally en banc reviewed and now the entire 4th will issue a ruling because the 3 judge panel was gonna vote 2-1 in favor of striking down the ban.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Allen65]

Interesting take, our favorite verbose YouTube lawyer covering what he thinks is happening here and why there’s no ruling.

Believes Thacker ran to the entire 4th circuit and they’ve internally en banc reviewed and now the entire 4th will issue a ruling because the 3 judge panel was gonna vote 2-1 in favor of striking down the ban.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If that's somehow true, it saves the step of a separate en banc and the costs associated with that. No matter what the decision, Bianchi is almost certain to be appealed back to SCOTUS by whichever party loses at 4CA, eventually. The faster that can happen, the better for us.

 

[snakep]

If it's true or not, the results are what he indicates...the 4CA is intentionally slowrolling the case.

 

[lennyk]

Completely agree, having en banc saves a lot of time. SCOTUS knows it is going do be their decision at some point. But they are big fans of tradition. They have to wait until the full circuit weighs in. Then there could be no questions.

 

[Apd09]

I’ll say this, if a YouTube attorney is starting to ask questions and pose theories, I’d imagine that SCOTUS (which obviously knows about the case since they remanded it) might also be starting to wonder what’s taking so long.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Boxcab]

Yep, [bold]The Supreme's[/bold] are letting them craft all their " workarounds " into the record. Then, they can be addressed one by one to put an end to the resistance to Bruen.

A few more months now may quell several more years of court battles and bad law making.


.



Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk