The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 3, 2014, 05:48 PM   #101
jbrown50
Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 2004
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 89
Quote:
Normally, in a civil case (such as this), the losing party has 30 days to file their NOTICE of Appeal, from the date that the entry of Judgment is made by the court clerk (Rule 4(a)(1)(A)).

Because the defendant (D.C.) is a Federal Agency, they come under Rule 4(a)(B)(ii), which gives them 60 days to file their NOTICE of Appeal.
Al,

The DC Government isn't a Federal Agency therefore the 30 day rule applies. Aug 26.
jbrown50 is offline  
Old August 4, 2014, 08:34 AM   #102
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,446
It's a federal enclave? And I'm given to understand the police chief works with a US Attorney?
JimDandy is offline  
Old August 4, 2014, 10:26 AM   #103
jbrown50
Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 2004
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 89
Quote:
It's a federal enclave? And I'm given to understand the police chief works with a US Attorney?
DC itself is not a federal enclave. There are lots of federal enclaves within DC such as the White House grounds, the Capitol grounds and surrounding Congressional buildings, The US Supreme Court, the National Mall/Monument/Memorials/museums, and military bases like the Navy Yard, etc.

DC's local government operates like a cross between a city and a state government. Even though it has a home rule charter Congress still technically has the final oversight and say over any laws passed.

Of course, DC's Police Chief co-ordinates with the US Attorney's office. With so much Federal property in DC that is necessary, but the chief is appointed by the Mayor and answers to the Mayor.
jbrown50 is offline  
Old August 4, 2014, 12:03 PM   #104
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,446
Quote:
DC itself is not a federal enclave.
Have a source for that? Every result I get for googling "Is DC a Federal Enclave" says it is, or isn't actually on point. Not one says it isn't so far.

Quote:
Even though it has a home rule charter Congress still technically has the final oversight and say over any laws passed.
Wouldn't that make the District of Columbia Federal? And why the OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA represents them. (Sorry for the all Caps, it was copy and paste to get it right) Additionally Wikipedia and this says the MPD was formed by an Act of Congress in 1861. Furthermore, it points out the MPD has been required, with other federal agencies, to prepare a report to Congress annually. One can also find quite a bit of information about DC Police and Firefighter retirement plans on the DoTreasury website if you hunt. All in all, I think it would be extremely easy for a lawyer to make the case that the US and/or it's officers are party to the lawsuit.
JimDandy is offline  
Old August 4, 2014, 01:08 PM   #105
motorhead0922
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 30, 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 507
Quote:
And why the OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA represents them.
Seems to me that in this case the District is acting like a state, not federal property. Federal restrictions that I know of always refer to a building and sometimes surrounding grounds (or a lake).
__________________
NRA, SAF, ACLDN, IDPA

"Give me liberty or give me death." - Patrick Henry
motorhead0922 is offline  
Old August 4, 2014, 01:13 PM   #106
Armorer-at-Law
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 29, 2002
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 371
Quote:
Seems to me that in this case the District is acting like a state, not federal property.
Exactly. Except DC does not have the sovereignty of a state and so was/is unquestionably subject to the 2A.
__________________
Send lawyers, guns, and money...
Armorer-at-Law.com
07FFL/02SOT
Armorer-at-Law is offline  
Old August 4, 2014, 01:39 PM   #107
jbrown50
Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 2004
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 89
DC is often referred to by many as a federal enclave which isn't totally accurate. The DC Government is a municipal government, not federal. It answers to Congress but it's not part of the Federal Government. It gets funding from the Federal Government which is mostly intended to make up for the lost revenue caused by DC not being able to tax the massive amount of federal property within it's borders. DC has a limited form of home rule whereas it can pass it's own laws and collect taxes. Those laws are still subject to approval by Congress. It has an Attorney General like a state but it's not a state.

I know people will continue to call DC a federal enclave no matter what I write here. My point is that the DC Government is not a branch of, nor is it part of the Federal Government. It is in the same category as a state government.
jbrown50 is offline  
Old August 5, 2014, 08:07 AM   #108
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
The District of Columbia is a Federal District and came into existence via operation of the Constitution itself:
Article I, Section 8, clause 17 - To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;
Simply because the Congress writes various laws that treats DC as if it was a State, does not detract from the fact that this enclave is, and barring further amendments, a Federal District, and treated within the Federal Courts as any other Federal Agency.

Further, it should be remembered that it required an amendment to the Constitution in order for the residents of this Federal District to be able to vote in the Presidential Election. See Amendment 23.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old August 5, 2014, 12:37 PM   #109
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,390
It looks as if they're not going to appeal, but that they'd rather come up with a law modeled on Maryland's standard.

Quote:
“As restrictive as possible,” is the suggestion of D.C. Councilmember David Catania, a Republican-turned-independent who is running for mayor.
Mayor Gray has stated that the stay gives the city enough time to come up with a law.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old August 5, 2014, 01:06 PM   #110
motorhead0922
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 30, 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 507
From Tom's link:
Quote:
The man leading the charge in the House, Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., taunted local leaders from the floor of the chamber about the impact of the judge’s ruling.

“Did gun-toting tourists commence to shoot-outs?” he asked rhetorically on Tuesday, three days after the judge’s order. “Did residents cower in their homes? Did vigilante posses maraud about the city? Did politicians revert to dueling at 10 paces? No, none of these things are happening. History will show the streets are safer today as more law-abiding residents and visitors are armed.”
Maybe there will be a move in the House to tie the hands of DC council.
__________________
NRA, SAF, ACLDN, IDPA

"Give me liberty or give me death." - Patrick Henry
motorhead0922 is offline  
Old August 8, 2014, 08:16 AM   #111
hvymax
Junior member
 
Join Date: August 7, 2014
Location: La Plata Md
Posts: 57
I was glad I could make it down during the window. I CC'd for the most part but had a few photo op's when the coast was clear.(Went viral on the internet) Between the flat top and gut I figured anyone who noticed would think I was a cop anyway. Can't seem to search and post pics for crying out loud.

Last edited by hvymax; August 8, 2014 at 11:03 AM.
hvymax is offline  
Old August 11, 2014, 12:07 PM   #112
dove
Junior Member
 
Join Date: January 11, 2013
Posts: 12
Hmm, from Tom's link it sounds to me like one of their justifications for why this should not be allow to fly in D.C. is that an armed populace is intimidating to those in power. Interesting
dove is offline  
Old August 19, 2014, 03:16 PM   #113
Segerrik
Junior Member
 
Join Date: July 27, 2011
Posts: 10
DC's Answer to Gura opposition to stay pending Appeal

Since the Court Archive still does not have the DC Answer posted I will link it here: http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/doc...n-ruling/1197/

DC stated that it will file for reconsideration.

Overall, the DC answer appears weak. It rambles and presents a new and rather unique argument in the answer. They argue that we don't need citizens carry firearms in public, that is what armed police are for. - See footnote 5. This really is a case of DC grasping at straws.

Hopefully the judge does not give an answer to DC until the 90 days are almost up.

Last edited by Segerrik; August 19, 2014 at 03:24 PM. Reason: Not done typing
Segerrik is offline  
Old August 19, 2014, 05:07 PM   #114
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,488
We don't need citizens having freedom of speech, either. Expressing political opinions is what we have politicians for.

Weak.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old August 19, 2014, 06:30 PM   #115
diamondd817
Member
 
Join Date: January 20, 2013
Posts: 18
We already have 18 state and federal cases that ruled the police have no duty to protect an individual. Now DC is going to tell us the police will protect us. Sorry, can't have it both ways. I'm tired of hearing only the police should have guns rhetoric.
diamondd817 is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 06:25 AM   #116
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondd817
We already have 18 state and federal cases that ruled the police have no duty to protect an individual. Now DC is going to tell us the police will protect us. Sorry, can't have it both ways.
Excellent point.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 10:12 AM   #117
Gary L. Griffiths
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 7, 2000
Location: AZ, IA, WA
Posts: 1,288
Quote:
We already have 18 state and federal cases that ruled the police have no duty to protect an individual.
And IIRC, one of those cases involves the DC Police!
__________________
Violence is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and valorous feeling which believes that nothing is worth violence is much worse. Those who have nothing for which they are willing to fight; nothing they care about more than their own personal safety; are miserable creatures who have no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of those better than themselves. Gary L. Griffiths, Chief Instructor, Advanced Force Tactics, Inc. (Paraphrasing John Stuart Mill)
Gary L. Griffiths is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 10:22 AM   #118
BobCat45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 18, 2004
Location: East Bernard, TX
Posts: 195
You do recall correctly, it was Warren vs District of Columbia.
__________________
Retractable claws - the *original* concealed carry

http://www.bayourifles.org
TinyURL.com/qgdojvh
BobCat45 is offline  
Old August 21, 2014, 07:44 PM   #119
TDL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 25, 2013
Posts: 172
Quote:
It looks as if they're not going to appeal, but that they'd rather come up with a law modeled on Maryland's standard.
Yeah, I spoke to one of the staff writing this up on the DC council judiciary.

Maryland seems to have a fair number of CCW, but in fact the great majority of those are retired LEO or and highly conditional some employment based allowing only for specific employment activity).

Dc is actually emboldened by Maryland's court victory and will write even more restrictive laws

In reality without police documented threats to your life you can forget getting a CCW in DC. And there will be no reciprocity whatsoever.
TDL is offline  
Old August 21, 2014, 08:51 PM   #120
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,488
Quote:
In reality without police documented threats to your life you can forget getting a CCW in DC. And there will be no reciprocity whatsoever.
That will NOT survive the Supreme Court (unless one of the justices retires and Obama gets to choose a successor).
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old August 22, 2014, 06:03 AM   #121
TDL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 25, 2013
Posts: 172
Quote:
That will NOT survive the Supreme Court (unless one of the justices retires and Obama gets to choose a successor).
And? Many of the 2008 post Heller DC regs would not survive either but they promulgated and kept them until 2011-12 until filings started to get traction.

If you recall, post heller, DC required all of the following for simple ownership which it kept for years and later dropped:
- expensive live training
- same caliber restriction on ammo
- fired casings
- fired round
- applicant supplied photo

And the differentiation between "May issue" and "No issue" has become sophistry as illustrated by the recent case law on Maryland's regs.

I believe DC will write the most restrictive CCW ever seen, and sadly I believe this will embolden other jurisdictions to follow.

I think they will issue a handful to retired LEO working as investigators or security, (say ironically, like Bloomberg's security detail) and then wait out the court challanges

As far as the make-up of the court a SCOTUS decision on such regs would occur after Obama, during perhaps Hillary's term and the actuary tables suggest she will be replacing several justices.
TDL is offline  
Old August 22, 2014, 06:29 PM   #122
krucam
Member
 
Join Date: September 21, 2010
Posts: 24
From Judge Scullin's Opinion:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judge Scullin
ORDERS that Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees and all persons in
active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of this Memorandum-
Decision and Order, are permanently enjoined from enforcing D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) to
ban registration of handguns to be carried in public for self-defense by law-abiding citizens
; and the Court further
ORDERS that Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and all persons in
active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of this Memorandum-
Decision and Order are permanently enjoined from enforcing D.C. Code § 22-4504(a); and the
Court further
ORDERS that Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and all persons in
active concert or participation from them who receive actual notice of this Memorandum-
Decision and Order from enforcing D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and D.C. Code § 22-4504(a)
against individuals based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District of Columbia.
Self Defense has to be sufficient reason for obtaining a permit by law-abiding citizens, see the 1st underlined section. If DC tries to craft a may-issue scheme ala MD/NJ/MA/NY, I would imagine some swift action will be taken under the District ruling without having to start a new case. Just my .02 worth.

Gotta love the caveat for non-residents of DC as well.

Reminder that the District has 30 days to Appeal to Circuit. That will happen by next Thursday, 8/28. IF DC does Appeal by then, they will likely ask for, and get, a Stay of Mandate while the case spends the next year or two going through Appeals.

How this will all shake out depends on the next move, which belongs to DC.
__________________
Mark C.
DFW, TX

Last edited by krucam; August 22, 2014 at 07:48 PM.
krucam is offline  
Old August 22, 2014, 07:56 PM   #123
maestro pistolero
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,090
Quote:
Gotta love the caveat for non-residents of DC as well.
Indeed. If that part of the ruling were eventually upheld by SCOTUS, then we would have the legal basis for nationwide reciprocity.
maestro pistolero is offline  
Old August 22, 2014, 08:59 PM   #124
Gary L. Griffiths
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 7, 2000
Location: AZ, IA, WA
Posts: 1,288
Looks like DC is going to appeal!

Whoda thunk it?

Of course, this is just the chairman of the city council, but it seems to be the way the wind is blowing there! This may be the one the Supremes are looking for.
__________________
Violence is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and valorous feeling which believes that nothing is worth violence is much worse. Those who have nothing for which they are willing to fight; nothing they care about more than their own personal safety; are miserable creatures who have no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of those better than themselves. Gary L. Griffiths, Chief Instructor, Advanced Force Tactics, Inc. (Paraphrasing John Stuart Mill)
Gary L. Griffiths is offline  
Old August 23, 2014, 06:56 AM   #125
steve4102
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,217
Quote:
In an exclusive interview, D.C. City Council Chairman Phil Mendelson told FOX 5 on Thursday that he will appeal the gun carry ruling, making the information public for the first time.
Does this city council Chairmen have the authority to make this Appeal?

Quote:
"The whole issue of the public carrying of a firearm is very complicated," Mendelson said. "And I believe the executive and the attorney general will continue with the appeal."
I thought he said He was going to appeal, now he is saying he believes the AG will.

Who does have the authority to appeal this case?

Then he goes on to say the city just asked the court for 6 more months to rewrite it's gun laws. Why would they do this if He is going to appeal?
steve4102 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 07:28 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 0.11717 seconds with 7 queries