View Single Post
Old October 30, 2012, 08:55 PM   #221
Al Norris
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,340
Here's is what I'm talking about in the context of saying, "Wishful thinking perhaps, but a sneaky way of telling the panel not to pull a 'Wilkinson?'":

“[i]f the Supreme Court, in this [Heller] dicta, meant its holding to extend
beyond home possession, it will need to say so more plainly.” Williams v. State, 417 Md. 479, 496 (Md. 2011). Quoted by Judge Harvey Wilkinson in United States v. Masciandaro, 638 F.3d 458 (4th Cir. 2011) (part IIIB).

Remembering that Judge Wilkinson wrote a scathing rebuke of the Heller decision (and Justice Scalia - Of Guns, Abortions, and the Unraveling Rule of Law), to which Alan Gura wrote his own response, this may indicate a further response to the circuit, in general, and (a further rebuke to) Judge Wilkinson is particular (yes, Judges do talk to one another).

Of course, this is mere speculation on my part. I have no inside information.
Al Norris is offline  
Page generated in 0.07005 seconds with 7 queries