Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion Discuss national gun rights and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1401  
Old 10-26-2019, 4:36 PM
Sputnik's Avatar
Sputnik Sputnik is offline
Shiny
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: East Bay
Posts: 1,581
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Perhaps the SC wants to refresh it's collective understanding of just how the 2CA arrived at its decision when it handed NYC the win? Maybe a slo-mo replay of the mental gymnastics would help?
Reply With Quote
  #1402  
Old 10-26-2019, 4:38 PM
splithoof splithoof is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 1,833
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruOil View Post
it is not a "move." It is the Clerk of the Supreme Court requesting that the District Court forward its entire file with indexes.
Hopefully then the SCOTUS will move forward and hear the case.
Now if RBG would only assume room temperature....
Reply With Quote
  #1403  
Old 10-26-2019, 9:23 PM
BryMan92 BryMan92 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 237
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sputnik View Post
Perhaps the SC wants to refresh it's collective understanding of just how the 2CA arrived at its decision when it handed NYC the win? Maybe a slo-mo replay of the mental gymnastics would help?
I think so. They could arrive at a ruling that not only clarifies parts of Heller but also eviscerates how the 2CA got to where they did.
Reply With Quote
  #1404  
Old 10-27-2019, 6:53 AM
bruss01's Avatar
bruss01 bruss01 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,687
iTrader: 21 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kharn View Post
Read the SG's amicus for Heller.

And note Paul Clement was the Solicitor General in Heller and is now the Counsel of Record for NYSRPA. A lawyer says whatever it takes to win the instant case, tomorrow is another day and another client.
Exactly. A lawyer's duty is to faithfully represent their client's position... not their own.
__________________
The one thing worse than defeat is surrender.
Reply With Quote
  #1405  
Old 10-31-2019, 1:02 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 9,340
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FirearmFino View Post
Filed today in NYSRPA v. NYC at the district court:

Appeal Remark as to 58 Notice of Appeal, filed by Jose Anthony Irizarry, Romolo Colantone, The New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., Efrain Alvarez, USCA Case Number 15-0638; SCUS Case Number 18-0280: Supreme Court of The United States requests District Court record on appeal. (tp) Modified on 10/24/2019 (tp). (Entered: 10/24/2019)
Latest on the docket:

Quote:
Oct 25 2019 CIRCULATED
https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/...ic/18-280.html
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #1406  
Old 10-31-2019, 10:27 PM
tenemae's Avatar
tenemae tenemae is offline
Code Monkey
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: ҚФꙦꙦѤ ꙆꚈҊԂ ô
Posts: 1,147
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

How might the inevitable impeachment proceeding affect the schedule for this?
Reply With Quote
  #1407  
Old 11-01-2019, 12:09 AM
Offwidth Offwidth is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 652
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Why would they care?
Reply With Quote
  #1408  
Old 11-01-2019, 1:39 AM
tenemae's Avatar
tenemae tenemae is offline
Code Monkey
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: ҚФꙦꙦѤ ꙆꚈҊԂ ô
Posts: 1,147
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

As far as I understand it, the chief justice has to preside over the impeachment hearing. I figure that will leave him little time elsewhere
Reply With Quote
  #1409  
Old 11-01-2019, 8:04 AM
Robotron2k84's Avatar
Robotron2k84 Robotron2k84 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 935
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

That’s only if this drive to impeach survives to make it to a trial. There is a less than 1% chance that the Senate will proceed with this debacle and not shut it down in under an hour once it’s handed to the upper chamber.

Remember, the Demonrats know that they can’t remove Trump; this is an extended attempt to discredit and drag his support down continuously until the 2020 election. No GOP voted to proceed with the impeachment investigation, in the House.

I don’t think Roberts will be visiting the Senate for any special duties, anytime soon.
Reply With Quote
  #1410  
Old 11-01-2019, 9:05 AM
onelonehorseman's Avatar
onelonehorseman onelonehorseman is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Southern Liberalandia
Posts: 4,700
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robotron2k84 View Post
Thatís only if this drive to impeach survives to make it to a trial. There is a less than 1% chance that the Senate will proceed with this debacle and not shut it down in under an hour once itís handed to the upper chamber.

Remember, the Demonrats know that they canít remove Trump; this is an extended attempt to discredit and drag his support down continuously until the 2020 election. No GOP voted to proceed with the impeachment investigation, in the House.
That's correct. The dems know they have no chance of getting the senate to actually help them with this wet dream. Their motive is to get voting fence-sitters to consider changing their voting plans before 2020 to give their candidate a boost.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1411  
Old 11-01-2019, 11:17 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 9,340
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tenemae View Post
How might the inevitable impeachment proceeding affect the schedule for this?
I doubt it will make it out of the House before orals on Dec 02, so Roberts won't have to adjust either his or this case's schedule, at least not before orals.
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #1412  
Old 11-01-2019, 11:50 AM
Apocalypsenerd's Avatar
Apocalypsenerd Apocalypsenerd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oceanside, CA
Posts: 927
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I suspect they(the DNC) will milk this for as long as they think it bends polls in their favor. Then expect an October surprise, which, shouldn't be a surprise, right before the election.
__________________
Let me handle your property needs and I will donate 10% of the brokerage total commission to CG.
Buy or sell a home.
Property management including vacation rentals.
We can help with loans and refi's. 10% of all commissions will be donated to CG.

Serving the greater San Diego area.

Aaron Ross - BRE #01865640
CA Broker
Reply With Quote
  #1413  
Old 11-03-2019, 3:21 AM
press1280 press1280 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: WV
Posts: 2,508
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruOil View Post
it is not a "move." It is the Clerk of the Supreme Court requesting that the District Court forward its entire file with indexes.
I think this is pretty standard. I have seen the record requested on occasion before the case is granted cert.
So all in all nothing to see here really.
Reply With Quote
  #1414  
Old 11-04-2019, 8:04 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 9,340
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

4 weeks until orals!



This is when the justices and their clerks are really bearing down on the case, hashing out the issues for and against, implications, etc (and probably how their possible opinions will affect the other 2nd A cases).
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif

Last edited by Paladin; 11-04-2019 at 8:07 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #1415  
Old 11-04-2019, 12:17 PM
BryMan92 BryMan92 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 237
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

I love your countdowns, Paladin. Also reminded me to book my flights home! :P
Reply With Quote
  #1416  
Old 11-05-2019, 8:06 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 9,340
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BryMan92 View Post
I love your countdowns, Paladin. ...
Some might wonder why I'm looking forward to oral arguments so much when they really decide NOTHING and have NO AUTHORITY. It's because I'm hoping for a moment, like in Heller below, that may make CA's last holdout county sheriffs realize the days of their restrictive CCW GC policies are numbered (or LOC w/o a permit is coming), and thus motivate them to throw in the towel immediately rather than wait for the decision and in order to take the wind out of the sails of 2nd A activists who will otherwise have Open Carry marches, protests, meet ups, etc.

California will be just like in Ohio in the early 2000s, when it was No Issue CCW. But then their Supreme Court said LOC (loaded Open Carry) was a right not requiring a permit. IIRC, it only took 1 year of meet up and protest marches causing "man with a gun" (or "men with guns") calls, before their legislature & governor threw in the towel and went straight from No Issue CCWs to Shall Issue. (And right now there's a close fight for Constitutional Carry in Ohio!)

Quote:
They even discussed gun locks and their relevance and if they were constitutional. Roberts asked the lawyer for DC to explain to him how a gun lock worked. The lawyer was miming how the lock works, the different kinds (through the trigger guard vs. though the handle and slide), etc. Roberts asked him if it was a combination. The lawyer replied some are. So Roberts goes "So you hear a bump in the night in your house. You turn on your bedside lamp. Then you get your reading glasses out. . . "
From: https://forum.quartertothree.com/t/d...esday/43084/10

Pretty much everyone in Court chuckled!

That, folks, is what is called a clue as to how "the Heller 5" viewed mandatory lock laws or anything that keeps you from being able to immediately defend yourself with your Arms (e.g., mandatory unloaded carry).

I'm hoping there will be a similar "sense of the Court (majority)" moment during NYSRPA.

__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif

Last edited by Paladin; 11-05-2019 at 8:26 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #1417  
Old 11-06-2019, 8:32 AM
scbauer's Avatar
scbauer scbauer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Walnut Creek, CA
Posts: 889
iTrader: 34 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
I'm hoping there will be a similar "sense of the Court (majority)" moment during NYSRPA.
We can all hope!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1418  
Old 11-11-2019, 1:41 PM
divert_fuse's Avatar
divert_fuse divert_fuse is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: SF, CA
Posts: 191
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
Quote:
They even discussed gun locks and their relevance and if they were constitutional. Roberts asked the lawyer for DC to explain to him how a gun lock worked. The lawyer was miming how the lock works, the different kinds (through the trigger guard vs. though the handle and slide), etc. Roberts asked him if it was a combination. The lawyer replied some are. So Roberts goes "So you hear a bump in the night in your house. You turn on your bedside lamp. Then you get your reading glasses out. . . "
That was actually Scalia, not Roberts. Roberts may have a sense of humor, although I've seen no evidence of it.
Reply With Quote
  #1419  
Old 11-11-2019, 9:13 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 9,340
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by divert_fuse View Post
That was actually Scalia, not Roberts. Roberts may have a sense of humor, although I've seen no evidence of it.
Here's evidence Roberts has a sense of humor.

Quote:
8 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: So how long does it
9 take? If your interpretation is correct, how long does
10 it take to remove the trigger lock and make the gun
11 operable.
12 MR. DELLINGER: You -- you place a trigger
13 lock on and it has -- the version I have, a few -- you
14 can buy them at 17th Street Hardware -- has a code, like
15 a three-digit code. You turn to the code and you pull
16 it apart. That's all it takes. Even -- it took me 3
17 seconds.
18 JUSTICE SCALIA: You turn on, you turn on
19 the lamp next to your bed so you can -- you can turn the
20 knob at 3-22-95, and so somebody --
21 MR. DELLINGER: Well --
22 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Is it like that? Is
23 it a numerical code?
24 MR. DELLINGER: Yes, you can have one with a numerical code.
1 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: So then you turn on
2 the lamp, you pick up your reading glasses --
3 (Laughter.)
From: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_ar...007/07-290.pdf p.83-84
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif

Last edited by Paladin; 11-11-2019 at 9:23 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #1420  
Old 11-12-2019, 8:17 AM
homelessdude homelessdude is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: inland empire
Posts: 1,012
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

You need to have your glasses on so you can see how bad you've been shot by the bad guy while screwing with the lock. Makes perfect sense.
Reply With Quote
  #1421  
Old 11-15-2019, 4:54 PM
AKSOG's Avatar
AKSOG AKSOG is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Nevada
Posts: 3,863
iTrader: 16 / 100%
Default

Per Chuck Michel twitter feed

NYSRPA v NYC SCOTUS case / breaking news: The United States government takes the official position that the case is NOT moot!
!https://supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/1...20%20views.pdf https://supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/1...20%20views.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #1422  
Old 11-15-2019, 5:08 PM
gobler's Avatar
gobler gobler is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: SGV near Azusa
Posts: 2,899
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AKSOG View Post
Per Chuck Michel twitter feed

NYSRPA v NYC SCOTUS case / breaking news: The United States government takes the official position that the case is NOT moot!
!https://supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/1...20%20views.pdf https://supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/1...20%20views.pdf
So, it's going to be heard? Fantastic!!
__________________
Quote:
200 bullets at a time......
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-5/198981/life01.jpg

Subscribe to my YouTube channel ---->http://www.youtube.com/user/2A4USA
Reply With Quote
  #1423  
Old 11-16-2019, 8:11 AM
scbauer's Avatar
scbauer scbauer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Walnut Creek, CA
Posts: 889
iTrader: 34 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AKSOG View Post
Per Chuck Michel twitter feed

NYSRPA v NYC SCOTUS case / breaking news: The United States government takes the official position that the case is NOT moot!
!https://supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/1...20%20views.pdf https://supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/1...20%20views.pdf
Yep, saw that and came here to make sure the thread was updated. Great news!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1424  
Old 11-16-2019, 10:03 AM
silvertear silvertear is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 147
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

So, this basically adds more weight against NYC's arguments for orals if the US Gov't comes out and calls BS on the mootness claim, right?
Reply With Quote
  #1425  
Old 11-16-2019, 10:29 AM
mshill's Avatar
mshill mshill is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,221
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Did I read it correctly? It seems that the court denied mootness on the potential of "damage claims" and not on the two step orchestrated by the state of NY to moot the case with additional bad law.

Did anyone else read it like that?
__________________
Quote:
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.
Reply With Quote
  #1426  
Old 11-16-2019, 11:47 AM
ShadowGuy's Avatar
ShadowGuy ShadowGuy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 150
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mshill View Post
Did I read it correctly? It seems that the court denied mootness on the potential of "damage claims" and not on the two step orchestrated by the state of NY to moot the case with additional bad law.

Did anyone else read it like that?
Thatís how I read it, but itís from the Solicitor General not SCOTUS. They will still be discussing mootness. None the less at least itís in favor for not mooting.
Reply With Quote
  #1427  
Old 11-16-2019, 3:04 PM
mshill's Avatar
mshill mshill is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,221
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadowGuy View Post
Thatís how I read it, but itís from the Solicitor General not SCOTUS. They will still be discussing mootness. None the less at least itís in favor for not mooting.
Thanks. I had to re-read that it was addresses to the court and not from it.

Just think if this was coming from a Clinton administration DOJ.
__________________
Quote:
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.
Reply With Quote
  #1428  
Old 11-17-2019, 8:33 AM
OleCuss OleCuss is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 6,111
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadowGuy View Post
Thatís how I read it, but itís from the Solicitor General not SCOTUS. They will still be discussing mootness. None the less at least itís in favor for not mooting.
Absolutely correct. However, sometimes a Solicitor General is called the 10th justice because they can have a lot of influence on the case.

This makes it pretty likely that the case will not be considered moot and will be addressed.
__________________
CGN's token life-long teetotaling vegetarian. Not qualified to give any legal opinion so pay attention at your own risk.
Reply With Quote
  #1429  
Old 11-18-2019, 8:51 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 9,340
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

2 weeks until orals!

__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #1430  
Old 11-18-2019, 11:10 AM
AKSOG's Avatar
AKSOG AKSOG is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Nevada
Posts: 3,863
iTrader: 16 / 100%
Default



Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
2 weeks until orals!

Reply With Quote
  #1431  
Old 11-18-2019, 11:42 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 9,340
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Cross posting this from the "SCOTUS watch" thread in case anyone wants to attend oral arguments.

hat tip to Librarian

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
Nice article from Josh Blackman at Volokh Conspiracy on how to attend oral arguments.

https://reason.com/2019/11/18/how-to...supreme-court/
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #1432  
Old 11-18-2019, 12:07 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 9,340
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

For those who won't be able to attend, audio and the transcript of oral arguments will eventually be posted the SCOTUS website.

Quote:
Beginning in October Term 2017, Heritage Reporting Corporation will provide the oral argument transcripts that are posted on this website on the same day an argument is heard by the Supreme Court. Same-day transcripts are considered official but subject to final review.
from: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_ar...ranscript/2019

Quote:
The audio recordings of all oral arguments heard by the Supreme Court of the United States are available to the public at the end of each argument week. The audio recordings are posted on Fridays after Conference.
from: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_ar...ent_audio/2019
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif

Last edited by Paladin; 11-18-2019 at 4:06 PM..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 4:48 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.