Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Peetza
No legal eagle here, but from talking to Jim Tresmond, and if memory serves me correctly, he thought it would be next spring.
|
For some perspective, let's look at the time line in the
Parker v. CA case (Challenge to Ab962 - pistol ammo ban - #22 on the list).
The case was filed back oin July of 2010. a Permanent Injunction was issued against the State in Jan. 20th, 2011. Compared to the federal courts we had been following, this was quite fast.
Oh, but it's not over! The State appealed on 06/14/2011 and the appeal is still ongoing, almost 2 years later! I can guarantee that whichever side loses, the case will be appealed to the CA Supreme Court. So we are looking at another 2-3 years of continued litigation on this case.
I suspect the reality of the NY cases to be about the same.
Meanwhile we are also on course to get another case before the US Supreme Court.
The Court may actually prefer to take on the
Moore case (for several reasons), so they may decide to delist
Kachalsky, in hopes that Madigan will file for cert. Yet
Woollard is still alive, because of the petition for
en banc. I feel Magiagn will not file for cert. This puts the ball in Gura's court with a possibly delisted
Kachalsky and a probable denial of
en banc in
Woollard - which will then be petitioned for cert. Another possibility is that
Kachalsky is granted cert. In which case,
Woollard would be granted the
en banc rehearing, but would be immediately stayed, pending
Kachalsky.
Moore is the cleanest case, as it poses a total ban on carry.
Woollard is the next cleanest case, as Mr. Woollard actually held a permit, before it was denied at a second renewal, even though
Kalchalsky and
Woollard are essentially the same, at law.
So we have Gura covering all the bases.
We also have most all of the lower courts in rebellion against the
Heller decision. While we really don't know how the SCOTUS feels about being ignored by the lower courts, I suspect none of the Justices like this, regardless of their personal feelings on
Heller/McDonald.
Then we have the folks over at SCOTUS Blog who have made
Kachalsky, a petition to be watched. These attorneys and court reporters are very good at picking the cases that the Court will most likely select to hear.
This brings us the reality that we will have some of the issue of carry outside the home, settled by June of 2014 to about 75%-80%. How far it may be settled will depend upon which of these three cases the Court decides to take.
This all ties in with the post by our new member, Charles Mosteller (welcome, Charles). The next "vampire."
The idea of "in common use" along with fees will be the next hurdle, with perhaps fees being in a slight lead.
Now that the battles seem to have shifted to individual States, we will need more attorneys like James Tresmond (NY), Jason Davis (CA) and Michel & Assoc. (CA) to begin the heavy lifting at this level, while others, Like Gura, Sigale, Manley, Monroe, Kilmer and Jensen continue to hammer away at the Federal Level.