|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 2, 2017, 10:55 AM | #76 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 18, 2013
Location: Albany Park, Chicago
Posts: 776
|
They've only been granting cert to one case a week so far. That has to change this month, I expect the pace to pick up considerably starting Monday. Only 4 more days to issue orders!
|
June 2, 2017, 01:22 PM | #77 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
SCOTUS receives 7,000-8,000 petitions each term. SCOTUS grants cert in about 80 cases per term: That's about one percent.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/faq.aspx#faqgi9 |
June 5, 2017, 09:24 AM | #78 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 18, 2013
Location: Albany Park, Chicago
Posts: 776
|
Once again no action on Peruta today. We'll have to wait at least another week.
|
June 5, 2017, 02:50 PM | #79 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
In this mornings live blog, I thought it was rather humorous when Amy (I believe it was her doing the live blog) answered a question about nothing about Peruta: "Yeah. Keeping us on pins and needles."
I'm beginning to wonder if they are going to hold it over for the October 2017 session. |
June 5, 2017, 03:28 PM | #80 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 10, 2004
Location: Tioga co. PA
Posts: 2,647
|
It could be they are looking for a 5th vote.
__________________
USNRET '61-'81 |
June 5, 2017, 07:29 PM | #81 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 6,875
|
Quote:
I have to assume or at least want to believe none of the judges know how they will vote until they've actually heard the case ? How ever I keep hearing people seeming to say they wont take a case unless they have the votes . How do they know if they have the votes if none of them have heard the arguments ??
__________________
If Jesus had a gun , he'd probably still be alive ! I almost always write my posts regardless of content in a jovial manor and intent . If that's not how you took it , please try again . |
|
June 5, 2017, 09:21 PM | #82 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
They probably lack a fourth vote to grant cert.
|
June 7, 2017, 12:43 AM | #83 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 1, 2011
Posts: 356
|
The answer, Metal God, is that the petition for cert, the opposition and the reply pretty much set out not just the issue but the essential arguments that will be made and the authority relied upon. the actual briefing simply expands and expounds upon those themes, and allows others a chance to chime in with their own opinions and research-i.e., to add the scholarship that will eventually inform the opinion. Thus, by the time the petition is actually considered by the court, the various justices have a pretty good idea how they feel about the particular subject in issue.
|
June 8, 2017, 09:55 AM | #84 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
The justices already have their world views on gun rights. 4 oppose them in principle. They do not exist.
One strongly supports them (Thomas). The others are wishy-washy when it comes to actually changing current laws to expand carry, limit state bans and the like. They were OK with theoretical blather like Heller and McD for gun rights, but when it comes to now getting more guns and more types of guns out there in use by knocking down state regs - they are not there at all. Gorsuch, even he is an advocate as strong as Scalia - which is unknown, does not change this balance. As far as briefs and opinions - I have said before that they all have a world view on guns, they then mine past decisions, opinions, etc. to support their position. They do not have views changed by new 'scholarship' or reasoning. They tell their clerks to write for what they know they want to do. The idea that SCOTUS will void state bans and mandate all states become shall issue is a pipe dream with the current court and probably for the reasonable future courts. It's all 'reasonable restrictions'. The peasants can have shotgun and a revolver at home at best for some of them. For the others, not even that.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
June 8, 2017, 10:15 AM | #85 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 2, 2013
Posts: 975
|
Quote:
|
|
June 8, 2017, 10:30 AM | #86 | |
Member
Join Date: March 4, 2009
Location: Albion, PA
Posts: 93
|
Quote:
And I was under the (mistaken) understanding that well reasoned thought went into their opinions. It turns out it is just the third (political) arm of our system of our government. |
|
June 12, 2017, 10:20 AM | #87 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
|
June 16, 2017, 06:39 AM | #88 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 23, 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,952
|
Today is the 16th, did they make a decision yesterday or kick down the road again?
|
June 16, 2017, 08:51 AM | #89 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 18, 2013
Location: Albany Park, Chicago
Posts: 776
|
Monday is the next day to issue orders.
|
June 18, 2017, 02:30 PM | #90 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
For those of you that have not followed this case (or would like to refresh their memories) in full, our friends at Michel & Associates have a web page that has every important document in the Peruta case. From the District court to the Supreme Court.
Peruta v. San Diego | Michel & Associates, P.C. |
June 18, 2017, 04:05 PM | #91 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 30, 2006
Posts: 1,433
|
THANK YOU. Very informative.
__________________
Vietnam Veteran ('69-'70) NRA Life Member RMEF Life Member |
June 19, 2017, 08:33 AM | #92 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 18, 2013
Location: Albany Park, Chicago
Posts: 776
|
No new grants today. Neither was Peruta denied, so it looks like we wait another week.
|
June 20, 2017, 11:59 PM | #93 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 1, 2011
Posts: 356
|
This coming week is kind of a big deal. since there is only one session left, the Court will either grant or deny, or be forced to kick it over to next term. If it goes over, and if one of the justices retires (there are two for whom there is a distinct possibility), the possibility of a grant increases if Trump is able to confirm another pro-2A justice. So until next week....
|
June 26, 2017, 09:43 AM | #94 | |||
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
They've denied cert for Peruta. It won't be heard this session.
The Order List [pdf] contains a dissent [p. 30] written by Justices Thomas and Gorsuch which is worth reading. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|||
June 26, 2017, 10:02 AM | #95 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 13, 2006
Posts: 8,283
|
There are rumors today that Justice Kennedy may retire.Justice Ginsburg does not have long.
I don't have a source,but I heard Pres Trump has said he will continue to select from his list. Of course,nothing is certain,other than there will be a battle over the next SCOTUS Justice. IMO,at this point, I have a guarded optimism the makeup of SCOTUS may soon be more favorable to 2A decisions. So,"Declined to hear" is not all bad. We could have one or two originalists in the near future. |
June 26, 2017, 10:08 AM | #96 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
June 26, 2017, 10:19 AM | #97 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
The problem is that the rest of the 'conservative' justices don't care about the issue. They couldn't be counted on to vote in a pro 2nd Amend. fashion.
They at best probably think a Biden Special shot gun or at best SW Model 10 under the pillow is what the 2nd is all about. Carrying guns, assault rifles, hi cap mags - not for their tender souls. The SCOTUS is useless for expansion of gun rights anymore, IMHO. The solution has to be legislative but the GOP has no real interest in such. Just progun blather and no real action. Gets votes and money for progun advocacy organizations.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
June 26, 2017, 11:15 AM | #98 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 27, 2008
Posts: 2,199
|
So, are there any options from here, or is Peruta a dead case?
|
June 26, 2017, 11:16 AM | #99 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
I would like to add that the solution is not to wait for the golden moment from SCOTUS.
Congress in the past has protected other civil rights (such as antidiscrimination and voting rights legislation) in concert with SCOTUS decisions. It is time for Congress to stop playing around with minor matters like the HPA. It is time to propose legislation that: 1. Comes up with a reasonable scheme for reciprocity (not allowing a higher standard based on what NY or CA might want). 2. Forbid state bans on weapons type, mags, ammo that exceed Federal legislation. However, Congress won't do that. In my tin foil mind, the progun forces prefer to have restrictions out there to generate uproar and votes. Vote for us because the other party is worse. So we just get meaningless blather at the NRA convention. Now stopping new gun bans on the Fed level is just fine. But playing defense doesn't cut it. If I were the NRA - I would tell the progun party - that they become MORE proactive (cut screwing around with some other issues) and move progun stuff or we just might not campaign so hard for you. The other party found out that ignoring the wishes and needs of its constituents reduced turn out. That's a hint. Both parties and their advocacy groups really don't want to come to a real solution as then folks won't pay attention or vote for them. It's a devil's pact.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
June 26, 2017, 11:49 AM | #100 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-...ry-guns-239953
Gorsuch says the right things. However, note that the three other 'right' leaning justices can't be bothered. So gun rights needs three new justices of the correct inclination for progress to be made on more aggressive gun rights issues. I don't see that happening soon.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|