The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 17, 2013, 09:31 PM   #351
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,430
The Washington times has a good interview with Gura today. He's not too worried about Woollard losing its shot, and he suggests that the Court is waiting for a more clear split.

His next step is petitioning for Drake v. Filko.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old October 18, 2013, 10:53 AM   #352
Dan F
Member
 
Join Date: July 13, 2011
Location: MD *gah*
Posts: 54
I wonder about the "more clear split"... if Moore in the 7th doesn't qualify as a split with Kachalsky, and now Woollard, how likely is it that the 3rd or the 9th will hand down decisions that will produce the "more clear" split?

I'll of course defer to Gura's judgement on whether or not to have optimism on how things will develop, but I have to wonder if he's trying to spin this and is actually discouraged, or even very discouraged, by this turn of events.

*sigh*

I was so hopeful with Woollard... now I'm wondering if the 5 of Heller and McDonald won't follow their own lead and treat the Second Amendment as a fundamental right.

Dan
Dan F is offline  
Old October 18, 2013, 11:48 AM   #353
press1280
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 17, 2012
Posts: 221
If we win at the 9th Circuit, there will be an absolutely clear split. It may not even be enough. SCOTUS has let splits go on for years.
press1280 is offline  
Old October 18, 2013, 01:04 PM   #354
speedrrracer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 15, 2011
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 261
I wonder if, at some point, it's still reasonable to have only one group of SCOTUS Justices. We have far more members in the House of Reps than ever before. The President has a legion of bureaucrats to help run this colossus. I'm sure this point has been raised a million times, I just haven't seen the discussion.

Clearly Supreme means Supreme, but nowhere does it say we're limited to only one set of Justices. We have 330+ million people, but the same number of SCOTUS Justices as back when this nation only had 30 million people.

Perhaps we should triple (or...) the number of Justices, and have the ability to resolve 3 times as many cases.
speedrrracer is offline  
Old October 18, 2013, 02:33 PM   #355
Dan F
Member
 
Join Date: July 13, 2011
Location: MD *gah*
Posts: 54
Press... yeah, and a win in the 9th would be great. But how likely are either the 3rd or 9th to "side with" the 7th?

I haven't heard anything that would lead me to believe that they will do anything other than follow the 2nd and 4th. The 7th wins in Moore and Ezell seem to be the only ones that have gone our way (which is, of course, the only correct one ). All the rest seem to distinctly lean as far in the other direction as they can, no matter how contorted they have to make their logic to do so.
Dan F is offline  
Old October 18, 2013, 03:02 PM   #356
maestro pistolero
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,091
One small point that gives me some hope is that Posner is so highly respected in circuit courts of appeal. If it were teetering at all, perhaps the ninth circuit would give additional serious consideration to "bear" after the Moore case.

In any case, I can't help but think that SCOTUS is very interested in how the cases in the ninth circuit shake out. I am certain they don't want to leave any stone unturned after all of this. They like issues to be fully ripe, and without the 9th decisions, they can't be certain to address all the issues that may surface.

Aside from two or three other significant cases outside of the ninth, we have little else on which to hang our hat of hope. The country's skill at sharpening pitchforks is woefully out of date. May it stay that way for a long time to come.

Last edited by maestro pistolero; October 18, 2013 at 03:08 PM.
maestro pistolero is online now  
Old October 19, 2013, 08:22 AM   #357
press1280
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 17, 2012
Posts: 221
Dan-the 3rd Circuit already ruled in Drake, they essentially followed the 2nd and 4th Circuits, although some of the reasoning was different. But a loss is a loss. After the CA9 case, there's a case waiting at the NJ Supreme Court(Pantano,I believe it could be heard around May of next year). There's some other cases further behind at various state/Federal district court levels.

I think the odds of a win at CA9 are pretty good from what I heard from the oral arguments. Then again these Federal Courts sometimes don't like being the odd man out and just want to follow the others just so they don't create a split.
press1280 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

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 -5. The time now is 06:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10786 seconds with 10 queries