Will the New York ruling ever take place in MD?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • TLL

    God Bless America
    Jan 6, 2011
    1,012
    Virginia
    Time for another shameless plug to donate generously to the MSI Legal Fund .
    When I was still in MD, I donated $50 for executive membership prior to the 2013 debacle. It was ignored /lost in the shuffle .
    Now I'm trying for a MD nonresident permit, so I guess I'll send them some more just to be part of the action. I have to support VCDL also.

    Sent from my motorola one 5G ace using Tapatalk
     

    whistlersmother

    Peace through strength
    Jan 29, 2013
    8,036
    Fulton, MD
    All of this is going to be thrown out in short order. Judge Thomas spelled it out for the lower courts to handle this, and handle it quickly.

    No more waiting 10 years for the case to get all the way back to the SC

    Was just on Reddit r/nyguns and a lawsuit is being filed already to get this ******** thrown out

    And if all the intervening courts are hostile to NYSRPA decision?

    How long to get back to SCOTUS?

    I have no faith that the lower courts will abide by NYSRPA any more than they did with McDonald/Heller.
     

    DC-W

    Active Member
    MDS Supporter
    Patriot Picket
    Jan 23, 2013
    25,292
    ️‍
    I recall the former NRA rep for MD telling all of us in a 2014 workgroup, “This issue will be before the Supreme Court in 10 years.”

    She was talking about the ban portion of the Firearm Safety Act of 2013. Here we are nearly a decade later. She’s pretty damn close to being dead on.
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,070
    10 years at least
    Maybe. But I doubt it. With the new members on the Court and a 6-3 majority, personally I think this Court has begun enforcing the 2A. We may not always like what they do, but I think 2A cases will now be treated like other cases under Rule 10 of the Court's rules governing cert. See attached. Judges on the lower courts aren't stupid. They can see that.
     

    Attachments

    • Rule 10. Considerations Governing Revie...pdf
      479.3 KB · Views: 32

    lazarus

    Active Member
    Jun 23, 2015
    10,794
    And if all the intervening courts are hostile to NYSRPA decision?

    How long to get back to SCOTUS?

    I have no faith that the lower courts will abide by NYSRPA any more than they did with McDonald/Heller.
    IIRC it is possible to petition the supreme court directly once the district court has issued a decision. As far as I am aware, that almost never gets taken up. I don't think it HAS to be decided by the appeals court again first. But if judges really, really, really wanted to F around with it, it could take 2-3 years to render a district court decision and then 2-3 years for an appeals court. And then it could take 1-2 years for the Supremes. I suspect though if the courts had the obvious taint of trying to drag out decisions contrary to the supreme court's instructions, SCOTUS would likely agree to hear it quickly. OR another option to is it takes 10 years for SCOTUS to hear it, but they can hear an injunction request on an expedited basis and issue an injunction against the law while it works its way through the court system for a decade. Shadow docket and all that.

    Most likely if courts aren't deliberately trying to slow the decision, 3-18 months at each level depending on how busy the courts are, how agreeable the attorney's involved are on scheduling, issuing responses to the court, etc.

    With these GVR'd cases, I expect it to take less than a year, even if the appeals court kicks it back to the district court rather than deciding themselves.

    Speaking of, looking at NY what what they just did to carry law and ammo/magazines. I would absolutely EXPECT that if any AWB get overturned a state like NY (and CA and HI and probably MD) would immediately turn around and say, fine! You can have your AWBs, but they have to all be registered, EVERYONE, registration has to be renewed annually at $1,000 a firearm, Class E felony to be in possession of one without a valid registration, oh and a 1,000% tax on each one sold. Plus each standard capacity magazine has to be registered at $200 a year.

    It is painfully obvious NY at least has no intention of abiding by the spirit OR the letter of the instructions from the court. The decision was extremely clear that what NY is attempting to do violates both. Now the RIGHT judge might uphold it. Or at least if they ruled against it, it would only be against parts and they'd also likely refuse to issue an injunction. Appeals court would probably be less likely to rule for the law and maybe slightly more likely to issue an injunction. SCOTUS is going to smack it down HARD.

    So at the very least, I absolutely expect SCOTUS to at least issue an injunction within a few weeks if the district and appeals courts refuse to. And I think most district and appeals courts are going to take this law apart based on SCOTUS new instructions (especially since there are a LOT of conservative federal judges right and even many of the liberal judges will good faith follow SCOTUS instructions).

    My fear is we don't have either a very strong Appeals court ruling, or better yet, a SCOTUS ruling on this before MGA starts up their session this winter and plays the same FAaFO game with us. At least our legislature seems mildly less inclined to try to F over everyone just to make a point and look at MD gun laws and the history of the being enacted compared to NY. NY likes to just ejaculate giant tranches of gun laws every few years trying to screw over gun owners as much as possible. MD had FSA2013 and...some incrementalism over the years. Though the current legislature sure seems more nuts than it has in years past.
     

    hodgepodge

    Senior Member (Gold)
    Sep 3, 2009
    9,503
    Arnold, MD
    f6da5d0dd6279c73575c7b18b25e5faf.jpg
     

    Biggfoot44

    Active Member
    Aug 2, 2009
    26,726
    It’s Larry and the Secretary both whom are the responsible parties.


    But no Secretary will do anything controversial without running it past the AG first . And the above referenced AG letter prohibits the Gov from telling the Secretary what to do .

    IF we had a Governor with determination , they could :

    Defy an AG letter , and dare the AG to sue him .

    Dismiss Secretary , and subsequent Acting Secretaries every 3 days , until one of them figures out the unspoken hint on their own .


    Likelihood of either ? See pig flying in hell holding an ice cream cone .
     

    dblas

    Past President, MSI
    MDS Supporter
    Apr 6, 2011
    11,329
    Maybe. But I doubt it. With the new members on the Court and a 6-3 majority, personally I think this Court has begun enforcing the 2A. We may not always like what they do, but I think 2A cases will now be treated like other cases under Rule 10 of the Court's rules governing cert. See attached. Judges on the lower courts aren't stupid. They can see that.
    I'm also guessing, at least with regards to the GVR'd cases, we (the 2A community) are done playing nice and probably won't agree to extensions for the defendants?
     

    teratos

    My hair is amazing
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 22, 2009
    51,665
    Bel Air
    I'm also guessing, at least with regards to the GVR'd cases, we (the 2A community) are done playing nice and probably won't agree to extensions for the defendants?
    If we play nice I’m going to be mad. That time is over. There should be no begging to exercise a right. Only demands for immediate relief from this oppressive and Constitutionally ignorant regime.
     

    fabsroman

    Active Member
    Mar 14, 2009
    31,764
    Winfield/Taylorsville in Carroll
    It's definitely supposed to be for * single issue * . Even IF it were supposed to be " budgetary " , the definition can be stretched to virtually anything . The state would collect application fees , and LD staffing will need to be expanded , both are budgetary .

    That said , I'd still be surprised for a Special Session over this . My prediction is their current Plan A is to drag their feet , and play the " oh gosh , we're backlogged , you'll have to be patient " like they did in 2012 with the 365 .

    Yeah , yeah , they " can't " do that , MSI will take them to Court over that , etc . But their goal will be to stall until MGA session .
    Believe there is recourse for individuals after the 90 day period has expired wherein the individual can file with the Office of Administrative Proceedings. That is a much quicker process than filing with the US District Court of Maryland. Plus, isn't Call in front of the 4th Circuit right now regarding this very issue, and the only thing that needs to be done in that case is the application of the Bruen holding to G&S in the case.
     

    press1280

    Active Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,058
    WV
    Maybe. But I doubt it. With the new members on the Court and a 6-3 majority, personally I think this Court has begun enforcing the 2A. We may not always like what they do, but I think 2A cases will now be treated like other cases under Rule 10 of the Court's rules governing cert. See attached. Judges on the lower courts aren't stupid. They can see that.
    I agree. I think with the way Heller was written and what was viewed as a super razor thin majority with wobblers Kennedy (and Roberts to an extent), the lower courts signaled to each other that any regulation short of a total ban would pass muster and the conservatives on the court would continue to pass on cases believing they may not win.
    This opinion will definitely have them thinking twice about doing that.
    But, I don't put it past activist judges to outright defy the ruling "for the children"
     

    Inigoes

    Head'n for the hills
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 21, 2008
    45,913
    SoMD / West PA
    If we play nice I’m going to be mad. That time is over. There should be no begging to exercise a right. Only demands for immediate relief from this oppressive and Constitutionally ignorant regime.
    There are 2 ways to this approach:

    1) Go around and try to bully everyone in our path. This path only irritates the target until someone forces them.

    2) Ask politely, to give them a chance to do the right thing. When they say "No", Strike out of nowhere with every legal tool in the kit, get them fired, and take everything they own.

    Option 2 is more satisfying as they lay desitute.
     

    teratos

    My hair is amazing
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 22, 2009
    51,665
    Bel Air
    There are 2 ways to this approach:

    1) Go around and try to bully everyone in our path. This path only irritates the target until someone forces them.

    2) Ask politely, to give them a chance to do the right thing. When they say "No", Strike out of nowhere with every tool in the kit, get them fired and take everything they own.
    #2 is The Way
     

    dblas

    Past President, MSI
    MDS Supporter
    Apr 6, 2011
    11,329
    There are 2 ways to this approach:

    1) Go around and try to bully everyone in our path. This path only irritates the target until someone forces them.

    2) Ask politely, to give them a chance to do the right thing. When they say "No", Strike out of nowhere with every legal tool in the kit, get them fired, and take everything they own.

    Option 2 is more satisfying as they lay desitute.
    #2 is not out of line with the proposal I made that the good Dr replied to.

    I am very much OK with #2.
     

    Inigoes

    Head'n for the hills
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 21, 2008
    45,913
    SoMD / West PA
    :thumbsup:

    Lately there has been plenty of bluster since the NYSRPA v Bruen decision.

    I see the cases in the ask nicely phase. Within the next 90 days or so,
    Everyone who filed for a carry permit should file a circuit court complaint in their county to have 5-306 held unconstitutional.

    Nothing in the Maryland law 5-312 says an applicant has to go through the administrative court which was designed to burn up more time.
     

    teratos

    My hair is amazing
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 22, 2009
    51,665
    Bel Air
    :thumbsup:

    Lately there has been plenty of bluster since the NYSRPA v Bruen decision.

    I see the cases in the ask nicely phase. Within the next 90 days or so,
    Everyone who filed for a carry permit should file a circuit court complaint in their county to have 5-306 held unconstitutional.

    Nothing in the Maryland law 5-312 says an applicant has to go through the administrative court which was designed to burn up more time.
    This is a good plan.
     

    Abuck

    Active Member
    :thumbsup:

    Lately there has been plenty of bluster since the NYSRPA v Bruen decision.

    I see the cases in the ask nicely phase. Within the next 90 days or so,
    Everyone who filed for a carry permit should file a circuit court complaint in their county to have 5-306 held unconstitutional.

    Nothing in the Maryland law 5-312 says an applicant has to go through the administrative court which was designed to burn up more time.
    As MSP has indicated that they are still using “good and substantial” can that be done now?

    Why wait if they are in blatant disregard of the SCOTUS ruling? I know they can issue a statement at any point to put themselves in compliance, but would it be helpful to further that along with a few lawsuits as soon as possible? I have not applied, and right now don’t have that discretionary income anyways, but some here might.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    262,847
    Messages
    6,728,268
    Members
    30,820
    Latest member
    82peterbilt

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom