The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 3, 2011, 01:48 PM   #251
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
Case # 10-1207, Williams v. Maryland, cert denied. Page 10 of this order list (PDF).
Al Norris is offline  
Old October 3, 2011, 09:57 PM   #252
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
In other news today, in Lane v. Holder, the appellees (plaintiffs) filed their opening brief in the 4th Circuit.

While the PDF is 74 pages in length, about 22 pages are headers and appendices. So in roughly 52 pages, Mr. Gura sets out a very well reasoned argument in favor of doing away with the ban on interstate handgun transfers. A copy of the brief is in this thread.


Back on 09-14, the defendant was given an extension of time to reply to the Second Amended Complaint in Enos v. Holder. The expected result of todays filing? A MTD. See this thread.
Al Norris is offline  
Old October 4, 2011, 11:19 AM   #253
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 5,641
The D. C. Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Heller 2 is out today:
http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/interne...36-1333156.pdf


The court of appeals upheld D.C.'s registration requirements and prohibitions on semi-autos 2-1. Lengthy dissent.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old October 8, 2011, 12:21 AM   #254
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
Some Loose ends...

Back on Sept. 28th, the SAF filed suit against the City of Omaha. See the press release here.

That's case #61 on the hit parade.
Al Norris is offline  
Old October 9, 2011, 02:38 PM   #255
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,550
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/09/us...ch.html?ref=us

Case stating that laws banning carry in religious places violate constitutional protections of worship.

Interesting, I've always thought this. Bans should be based on some demonstration of harm by the firearm. The only ones I would support are technical such as the gun by MRI and the like.

A ban because a place is holy is making a religious statement for that congregation.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old October 13, 2011, 08:53 AM   #256
thomas2011
Junior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2011
Posts: 2
It amazes me that it is very often in Christian circles wherein one hears arguments for law that somehow saves people. When you read the pastors comments in this article they somehow really believe that a law prohibiting the activity of carrying in a Church actually does something other than provide a mechanism for a judicial penalty to be imposed. They find their beliefs assaulted on every front, doctrines that are foundational for American jurisprudence itself, and then turn around and stand against the very principles they claim to believe in. Its just so sad that Churches that should be equipping Christian soldiers to do spiritual battle don't see the necessity for sustaining the ability to engage physical self defense once those spiritual forces break out into overt violence. There's been numerous instances over the years where gunmen have entered Churches and shot people - I would hope there would be a parishioner or two in every congregation that has the effective means of employing defense against that potential threat.
thomas2011 is offline  
Old October 14, 2011, 10:07 PM   #257
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
In the last 2 days, a fairly new member over at MDShooters opined on a couple of subjects. MirandaB claims to be a former civil rights attorney, in private practice for 10 years before starting another business, Just Right Carbines.

First MirandaB explained what was wrong with the Williams case and why the Supreme Court probably denied cert.

Then today, this person explained the Masciandaro case and why it might be granted cert.

The explanations go into a bit of depth on both cases, but this gentleman uses plain (non-legalese) language to get his points across. If you are at all interested in this stuff, I believe it is worth your while to read these explanations.

On Williams, see this post.

On Masciandaro, see this post.

If these won't show, try this thread. Williams is post #14 (page 1) and Masciandaro is post #22 (page 2).

I'm sure our resident attorneys can read this man's posts and glean from them whether or not the guy is being truthful. Just because they ring right to my ears, doesn't mean a thing. I'm not an attorney, just a somewhat knowledgeable commentator.
Al Norris is offline  
Old October 14, 2011, 10:09 PM   #258
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
Now that the case is back in the D.C. District court, Alan Gura filed his opening brief (an MSJ) in Dearth v. Holder.
Al Norris is offline  
Old October 16, 2011, 09:23 PM   #259
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
The Amended Complaint for Ezell is in.

See this thread, for more details.
Al Norris is offline  
Old October 18, 2011, 10:24 AM   #260
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
Another case has surfaced in the Supreme Court.

No. 10-1474
Edmund Chein v. State of California

Petition was filed on June 3rd, 2011. On Sep 15th, a response was requested, which was due yesterday (Oct. 17th).

Supreme Court Docket is here. The petition is here.

Quote:
The question presented is whether a state court can impose a categorical weapons ban – forbidding use, possession and even ownership of a firearm – as a condition of probation for a nonviolent misdemeanor offense without engaging in any level of constitutional means-end scrutiny of the restriction on the Second Amendment right.
Dr. Chein's attorney, Tarik S. Adlai, goes into detail on how the circuits are split in applying scrutiny (in 2A cases), in an attempt to further his clients case.

Quote:
Petitioner Edmund Chein’s case presents a good vehicle for resolving this issue. A 59 year old medical doctor with no prior criminal record, Dr. Chein was convicted of misdemeanor vandalism after he used a folding pocket knife to deflate the tires of an automobile that had repeatedly trespassed on his property, before calling for the assistance of the authorities. When sentencing him to a three-year term of probation, the California trial court imposed a categorical ban forbidding Dr. Chein to “own, use or possess any dangerous or deadly weapons, including any firearms” during the term of probation for his nonviolent misdemeanor offense. App. 3a, 8a. As the owner of several handguns kept for self-defense – as well as irreplaceable rare, antique or collectible firearms – Dr. Chein is being deprived of his Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self-defense and other lawful purposes while this condition remains in effect.
Al Norris is offline  
Old October 18, 2011, 09:51 PM   #261
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
The Solicitor General's brief in response to the Masciandaro cert is in. Next up, Masciandaro's reply brief, due in 10 days.

See this thread for the link to the brief.
Al Norris is offline  
Old October 19, 2011, 01:29 PM   #262
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
Yesterday, the plaintiffs in Ezell filed their response to Chicago's objections to the Preliminary Injunction.

See here for more details.
Al Norris is offline  
Old October 21, 2011, 12:04 AM   #263
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
Former SG Paul Clement (you remember him? He argued for the Feds against Heller and 2 years later argued for the NRA in McDonald) has just taken over the Peruta case. See the discussion thread for details.
Al Norris is offline  
Old October 21, 2011, 07:13 PM   #264
NatoRepublic
Member
 
Join Date: September 7, 2011
Posts: 22
I stumbled upon another nugget of Guraism while reading the latest reply to DC's notice of supplemental authority in the Palmer case. I thought you all might get a kick out of it.

Quote:
The Supreme Court has rejected the Alice in Wonderland approach
to statutory interpretation.... (“‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean
neither more nor less’”)....

On the note of the Palmer case, DC is attempting to site the Kachalsky case. The response put forth by Grua pretty much rips that appart and he filed another Notice of Supplemental using Heller II.
NatoRepublic is offline  
Old October 21, 2011, 09:46 PM   #265
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
Yup.

Gura knew that D.C. would file a notice of supplemental authority on Heller II. By filing his own notice, he beats D.C. to the punch and lessons any impact that the case may have had in this one.

Oh, and Welcome to The Firing Line, NatoRepublic.
Al Norris is offline  
Old October 21, 2011, 10:05 PM   #266
NatoRepublic
Member
 
Join Date: September 7, 2011
Posts: 22
Thanks for the welcome Al, I have been lurking so long I figured I might be able to help catch things that fell through the cracks. With the tidal wave of cases, it would seem hard for one person to keep up with them all. I am surprised you are able to keep it all straight.
NatoRepublic is offline  
Old October 21, 2011, 10:42 PM   #267
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
That's one of the reasons for all the links in each case.

A person can do a check of the Internet Archives for the case to see when the last update was made. If it been longer than the docket schedule shows something should have happened, then the link to the Justia Summary provides the gate into PACER for that case.

There's the added benefit that anyone who wants to volunteer, can do everything I'm doing.

Did you notice that the NC case, Bateman v. Perdue has been updated?

Nothing since last March, now all of a sudden the Judge orders discovery, despite the fact that two MSJ's (#44 and #52) are still pending! This case will get drug out, much like Chicago is doing in Benson.

Krucam, over at MDShooters, checked out that one.

Then there's a couple of folks over at CalGuns.net who are helping things out.

So what I do, is to keep a calendar filled out as to what's supposed to happen, and then check MDShooters to see if krucam has already gotten it (MD is 2 hours ahead of ID). Right now, we are both running about $100 per quarter in PACER charges.

Long story, a bit shorter... More help is always welcome!
Al Norris is offline  
Old October 24, 2011, 05:20 PM   #268
NatoRepublic
Member
 
Join Date: September 7, 2011
Posts: 22
Found another one to add to the pile Wilson v Holder.

Personally I am not exactly enthusiastic about being dragged into this fight.
NatoRepublic is offline  
Old October 24, 2011, 08:27 PM   #269
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
Is this a criminal or civil suit?

I ask, because (1) I don't think the SCOTUS wants criminal cases setting the bounds of the right and (2) I really don't want to clutter the list with criminal cases.

AAR, post a link.


[Emily Latilla voice] Nevermind... [/Emily Latilla voice]
Al Norris is offline  
Old October 24, 2011, 08:47 PM   #270
NatoRepublic
Member
 
Join Date: September 7, 2011
Posts: 22
I debated if I should post it up, the case itself isn't aimed at 2A very much, however I thought I would throw it out there. Mostly because if they bungle it bad enough it could get some bad precedent our way.

I could be wrong though, your thoughts would be helpful.
NatoRepublic is offline  
Old October 24, 2011, 09:10 PM   #271
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
See my response in the Wilson thread you started.

This whole thing has been coming to a head ever since 2005. The question in my mind: Can a fundamental right survive a challenge to the Commerce Clause?
Al Norris is offline  
Old October 24, 2011, 10:38 PM   #272
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
The case is Winters v. Willis, 11-120.

From the Asland Daily Tidings:

Quote:
Winters denied Willis a concealed handgun license in 2008 on the grounds that she uses medical marijuana, considered a controlled substance by the federal government. The sheriff argued that he couldn't give the license to Willis because that would violate the Gun Control Act of 1968. Winters has lost every court case so far, including the Oregon Supreme Court.
Oregon Court of Appeals decision.
Oregon Supreme Court decision.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf 11-120 winters v Willis cert petition.pdf (658.9 KB, 3 views)
Al Norris is offline  
Old October 25, 2011, 11:05 PM   #273
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
Today in Richards v. Prieto, Alan Gura has filed their reply to the defendants response. See the thread for details and discussion.

Also today, Chicago makes it (final?) reply in its Objection to the PI. See this thread for details.
Al Norris is offline  
Old October 26, 2011, 08:22 PM   #274
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
Today, Alan Gura filed the Notice of Appeal in Hightower v. Boston. Don't get to uptight about this, as it will be at least 1 to 2 months before we see the first brief.


Yesterday, Herschel Smith (Captains Journal) wrote up a very good analysis of the Governments Opposition to the Masciandaro petition for cert. Worth reading, here.
Al Norris is offline  
Old October 27, 2011, 10:34 PM   #275
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
Muller v. Maenza (SAF New Jersey), today:

Quote:
10/27/2011 36 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge William H. Walls: Motion Hearing held on 10/27/2011 re 25 Cross MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint filed by EDWARD A. JEREJIAN, RUDOLPH A. FILKO, RICK FUENTES, THOMAS A. MANAHAN, PAULA T. DOW, PHILIP J. MAENZA, 12 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by JOHN M. DRAKE, SECOND AMENDMENT FOUNDATION, INC., FINLEY FENTON, LENNY S. SALERNO, GREGORY C. GALLAHER, ASSOCIATION OF NEW JERSEY RIFLE & PISTOL CLUBS, INC., JEFFREY M. MULLER, DANIEL J. PISZCZATOSKI. (DECISION RESERVED) (Court Reporter/Recorder Yvonne Davion.) (lm2, ) (Entered: 10/27/2011)
http://www.archive.org/download/gov....49720.36.0.pdf

New Jersey Coalition for Self Defense (on Facebook) It appears the Judge is of the same opinion as the rest of the judges we've seen to date.
Al Norris 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 08:21 PM.


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 0.19412 seconds with 8 queries