skinnyb82 Posted May 17, 2016 at 06:39 PM Share Posted May 17, 2016 at 06:39 PM Hits just keep on coming for anti-gunners. Judge Leon out in DCD just granted a PI in another case involving the D.C. good cause provision. "Likely unconstitutional" hah. Pulled the memorandum opinion and order off the WaPo site as I couldn't find it anywhere else. Just found this so haven't had any time to read through it. But it's 40+ pages so it's gonna be good reading. http://cloud.tapatalk.com/s/573b65260eaae/asdf%282%29.pdf Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draal Posted May 17, 2016 at 06:55 PM Share Posted May 17, 2016 at 06:55 PM Thanks skinnyb! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmyers Posted May 17, 2016 at 07:08 PM Share Posted May 17, 2016 at 07:08 PM I like page 46. (Ok so I skipped to the end of the document, but it made me smile when I read it.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
out in the tall grass Posted May 17, 2016 at 07:09 PM Share Posted May 17, 2016 at 07:09 PM My favorite passage of this order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamma Posted May 17, 2016 at 07:14 PM Share Posted May 17, 2016 at 07:14 PM I've never seen a one word sentence of "Please." used in a judicial opinion before. Nice. The legal arguments used by the antis become so ridiculous that they need that kind of shaming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamma Posted May 17, 2016 at 07:39 PM Share Posted May 17, 2016 at 07:39 PM Note 24 at the bottom of page 39 should be enshrined somehow. It's a devastating indictment of the vast majority of gun control schemes foisted on the citizenry. Very thorough and well reasoned decision for a district court preliminary injunction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marie Posted May 17, 2016 at 11:35 PM Share Posted May 17, 2016 at 11:35 PM The comments on the Washington Post article are great. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/us-judge-strikes-down-dc-concealed-carry-gun-law-as-likely-unconstitutional/2016/05/17/d36d35dc-1c49-11e6-8c7b-6931e66333e7_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories_dc-gun-ban%3Ahomepage%2Fstory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted May 17, 2016 at 11:43 PM Author Share Posted May 17, 2016 at 11:43 PM Keep in mind this is the same Judge Leon who declared the NSA bulk metadata collection program to be likely unconstitutional, was subsequently reversed by the Circuit. Bottom line is that he's no fan of the government when it puts forth BS arguments as to why it must infringe on citizens' civil liberties in order to keep us safe yet fails to present an ounce of evidence bolstering its assertions. Sent from my VK700 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chislinger Posted May 18, 2016 at 12:09 AM Share Posted May 18, 2016 at 12:09 AM image.png My favorite passage of this order.That is awesome! Whenever a judge calls a anti lawyer's argumnent "poppycock" it's a beautiful thing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marie Posted May 18, 2016 at 12:18 AM Share Posted May 18, 2016 at 12:18 AM I bet the fact that the plaintiff was a member of the Pink Pistols (as well as the Pink Pistols being a plaintiff) will make some lib heads explode. I loved that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davey Posted May 18, 2016 at 12:22 AM Share Posted May 18, 2016 at 12:22 AM I've never seen a one word sentence of "Please." used in a judicial opinion before. Nice. The legal arguments used by the antis become so ridiculous that they need that kind of shaming.Where is this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamma Posted May 18, 2016 at 01:14 AM Share Posted May 18, 2016 at 01:14 AM I've never seen a one word sentence of "Please." used in a judicial opinion before. Nice. The legal arguments used by the antis become so ridiculous that they need that kind of shaming.Where is this? The sixth line on page 21. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Fife Posted May 18, 2016 at 02:25 AM Share Posted May 18, 2016 at 02:25 AM My girlfriend was pretty excited by the news but she thinks we should expect an appeal.https://twitter.com/EmilyMiller/status/732653357752455172 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fxdpntc Posted May 18, 2016 at 02:50 AM Share Posted May 18, 2016 at 02:50 AM My girlfriend was pretty excited by the news but she thinks we should expect an appeal.https://twitter.com/EmilyMiller/status/732653357752455172Tell her that her surfing pics are awesome... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Fife Posted May 18, 2016 at 02:55 AM Share Posted May 18, 2016 at 02:55 AM She knows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplant Posted May 18, 2016 at 07:29 AM Share Posted May 18, 2016 at 07:29 AM Keep in mind this is the same Judge Leon who declared the NSA bulk metadata collection program to be likely unconstitutional, was subsequently reversed by the Circuit. Bottom line is that he's no fan of the government when it puts forth BS arguments as to why it must infringe on citizens' civil liberties in order to keep us safe yet fails to present an ounce of evidence bolstering its assertions. Sent from my VK700 using TapatalkProbably one factor in denying plaintiffs motion for a permanent injunction. I wonder if Leon's decision will get vacated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted May 18, 2016 at 02:05 PM Author Share Posted May 18, 2016 at 02:05 PM Keep in mind this is the same Judge Leon who declared the NSA bulk metadata collection program to be likely unconstitutional, was subsequently reversed by the Circuit. Bottom line is that he's no fan of the government when it puts forth BS arguments as to why it must infringe on citizens' civil liberties in order to keep us safe yet fails to present an ounce of evidence bolstering its assertions. Sent from my VK700 using Tapatalk Probably one factor in denying plaintiffs motion for a permanent injunction. I wonder if Leon's decision will get vacated I don't know, it's a very solid opinion. Good news is the panel hearing Wrenn will be Senior Judge Kavanaugh, Judges Brown and Wilkins. Kavanaugh and Brown are both GOP nominees, left really despises Brown because she's black, Republican, and is pro-gun and pro-life. Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted May 28, 2016 at 06:35 PM Author Share Posted May 28, 2016 at 06:35 PM CADC just stayed Judge Leon's order pending appeal. District cites "irreparable harm" if the injunction wasn't granted. I love how they give the government a blank check to drag out the process, stall, lie, exaggerate, and trust the D.C. government when it says "We will suffer irreparable harm if we're forced to issue permits to residents who can't jump through 50 flaming hoops on a motorcycle." No idea who's on the motions panel, probably Garland or Srinivasan. Motion for stay pending appeal: http://cloud.tapatalk.com/s/5749e4a7eccf2/Grace_Defendants-Motion-to-Stay-The-Courts-May-17-2016-Order-Pending-Appeal-and-MOtion-for-an-Immediate-Administrative-Stay.pdf Order granting stay: http://cloud.tapatalk.com/s/5749e4b0a724a/Grace_Order.pdf Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
press1280 Posted May 28, 2016 at 10:11 PM Share Posted May 28, 2016 at 10:11 PM Keep in mind this is the same Judge Leon who declared the NSA bulk metadata collection program to be likely unconstitutional, was subsequently reversed by the Circuit. Bottom line is that he's no fan of the government when it puts forth BS arguments as to why it must infringe on citizens' civil liberties in order to keep us safe yet fails to present an ounce of evidence bolstering its assertions.Sent from my VK700 using Tapatalk Probably one factor in denying plaintiffs motion for a permanent injunction.I wonder if Leon's decision will get vacated I don't know, it's a very solid opinion. Good news is the panel hearing Wrenn will be Senior Judge Kavanaugh, Judges Brown and Wilkins. Kavanaugh and Brown are both GOP nominees, left really despises Brown because she's black, Republican, and is pro-gun and pro-life. Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk You're thinking of Janice Rogers Brown, this was Judith Rogers, a Clinton appointee, which probably explains why it was granted so quickly. I don't think this will necessarily be the panel that decides the case though (and hopefully I'm right). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted May 29, 2016 at 01:15 AM Author Share Posted May 29, 2016 at 01:15 AM I forgot the commonality of the name "Rogers." I'm not sure how that particular Circuit works insofar as assignation of Circuit Judges to be the motions judge, sit on the motions panel, merits panel (best described as "random drawing" but hardly random if the court has very proactive Clerk of the Court). The panel hearing arguments will be Kavanaugh, Rogers, and Wilkins. Kavanaugh is solid. Rogers....Clinton did an excellent job at nominating fringe liberals to the spots on the federal judiciary. Wilkins could be a wildcard but I highly doubt it. IMO he was a horrible district judge during his time on the bench in DCD. Looks like Wrenn is excrement up a creek. The Grace order is unsigned so it could be just one judge. Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted June 18, 2016 at 04:34 PM Author Share Posted June 18, 2016 at 04:34 PM The merits panel will be Circuit Judges Griffith (Bush II), Srinivasan (Obama), and Millett (Obama). Millett seems much more receptive to the Second Amendment than other Obama appointees. She basically bench slapped the government for trying to restrict lead bullets. Srinivasan delivered the opinion in the recent net neutrality case, also delivered an opinion in re a suit against the Iranian government for torture while incarcerated in the country. Srinivasan said that the torture allegations are (more or less) hearsay, no evidence that Iran tortures people (open a newspaper, Judge Srinivasan), so the plaintiff's suit was dismissed for lack of standing. Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
press1280 Posted June 18, 2016 at 05:33 PM Share Posted June 18, 2016 at 05:33 PM The merits panel will be Circuit Judges Griffith (Bush II), Srinivasan (Obama), and Millett (Obama). Millett seems much more receptive to the Second Amendment than other Obama appointees. She basically bench slapped the government for trying to restrict lead bullets. Srinivasan delivered the opinion in the recent net neutrality case, also delivered an opinion in re a suit against the Iranian government for torture while incarcerated in the country. Srinivasan said that the torture allegations are (more or less) hearsay, no evidence that Iran tortures people (open a newspaper, Judge Srinivasan), so the plaintiff's suit was dismissed for lack of standing. Sent from my VS987 using TapatalkDo you have a link for that? I thought the judges weren't announced until right around orals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted June 21, 2016 at 08:26 PM Author Share Posted June 21, 2016 at 08:26 PM CADC announces the merits panel during the week of orals so I'm not sure if these judges are on the motions panel and the merits panel will be drawn later or....what. But here's the text of the order setting a briefing schedule. "Matthew Grace and Pink Pistols, Appellees v. District of Columbia and Cathy L. Lanier, in her official capacity as Chief of Police for the Metropolitan Police Department, Appellants BEFORE: Griffith, Srinivasan, and Millett, Circuit Judges ORDER Upon consideration of the unopposed motion to extend the briefing schedule, it is ORDERED that the following revised briefing schedule will now apply: Appellants’ Brief July 6, 2016 Appendix July 6, 2016 Appellees’ Brief August 5, 2016 Reply Brief August 19, 2016 Per Curiam" http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Grace-v.-D.C._Order-Setting-New-Briefing-Schedule.pdf Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
press1280 Posted August 22, 2016 at 10:49 PM Share Posted August 22, 2016 at 10:49 PM Panel is up on the DC Circuit calendar https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/sixtyday.nsf/fullcalendar?OpenView&count=1000 Henderson (Bush 41 appointee but also a pure anti)Griffith (Bush 43, was on majority in Heller/Parker opinions)Williams (Reagan, senior status judge) This will be the same panel for the Wrenn case being heard the same day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWBH Posted August 24, 2016 at 10:21 PM Share Posted August 24, 2016 at 10:21 PM skinnyb82 - what an asset you are to the forum!! THANKYOU! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Nichols Posted August 25, 2016 at 12:41 AM Share Posted August 25, 2016 at 12:41 AM Before District of Columbia v. Heller was granted cert it was called Parker v. District of Columbia. Judge Griffith joined with Judge Silberman in striking down the D.C., bans. Judge Henderson filed a dissent. Some of you may think that this means there is one vote for and one vote against but you would be forgetting that Parker v. District of Columbia said that there is no right to concealed carry and this is a concealed carry case. I do not know how Judge Williams will vote but the writing is on the wall. Two of the three judges on this panel don’t think there is a right to concealed carry. They said so. Judge Williams was one of three judges who admonished Alan Gura for not bringing an as-applied challenge on behalf of his client in Schrader v. Holder. Alan Gura is the attorney for the plaintiffs in Wren v. DC. Do not be surprised if the decision in this case unanimously holds that there is no right to concealed carry and therefore fails the test for a preliminary injunction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted September 7, 2016 at 03:41 PM Author Share Posted September 7, 2016 at 03:41 PM I would be surprised if it's unanimous. Period. These types of cases are never unanimous in the relatively sane circuits (which excludes CA9). And the panel ruled on Parker with pretty much zilch for guiding case law as to RTC. Bottom line is that it's a crapshoot. Griffith is solid. Henderson is solid. Williams doesn't give a bleep because he's senior status, effectively retired, but still a wildcard. Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chislinger Posted September 20, 2016 at 06:31 PM Share Posted September 20, 2016 at 06:31 PM Oral arguments: https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/recordings/recordings2017.nsf/CAC0F3B3044D3E1E85258034005B1E7D/$file/16-7067.mp3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chislinger Posted September 20, 2016 at 06:32 PM Share Posted September 20, 2016 at 06:32 PM Oral arguments: https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/recordings/recordings2017.nsf/CAC0F3B3044D3E1E85258034005B1E7D/$file/16-7067.mp3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Nichols Posted September 20, 2016 at 10:31 PM Share Posted September 20, 2016 at 10:31 PM Circuit Judge Henderson, the one who thinks the Second Amendment does not apply to the District of Columbia, did not ask any questions. It is impossible to say, based on the questioning, whether or not Judge Williams thinks the Second Amendment applies outside of the home or whether or not he thinks the DC ban is a "reasonable regulation" on the Second Amendment right. Circuit Judge Griffith clearly thinks that the Second Amendment applies outside of one's home. The fact that these are concealed carry appeals came up during both sets of oral arguments. Oral arguments in Wrenn v. DC went on for 37:09Oral arguments in Grace v. DC went on for 27:48 Given that both sides were supposed to be limited to 10 minutes per side, it is probably a good sign that they went longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.