Jump to content


Photo

Wrenn v. DC


  • Please log in to reply
162 replies to this topic

#151 C0untZer0

    Member

  • Members
  • 12,041 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 11

Posted 27 August 2017 - 03:39 PM

This is a great flow chart for the Ninth Circuit but it only applies to CA9, I haven't found anything similar for the District of Columbia.

 

post-3474-0-74204400-1503869867.jpg

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

  • Ninth Circuit en banc procedure.jpg

Mayor Bloomberg himself has recently turned his attention from oversize soft drinks to gun control, confirming the tendency of the Progressive to go from nanny to tyrant.
- N. A. Halkides -
 

 


#152 press1280

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 189 posts
  • Joined: 23-October 11

Posted 28 August 2017 - 06:44 AM

The DC Circuit rules spell it out. A vote sheet will go to all active judges plus senior judge Williams who was on the panel. This asks if they would request a reply to the petition. If no judge says yes, then en banc is denied. If one says yes, then briefings commenced and another vote is held for en banc. Williams is excluded from this.

#153 C0untZer0

    Member

  • Members
  • 12,041 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 11

Posted 28 August 2017 - 11:58 AM

The DC Circuit rules spell it out. 

 

 

The timing requirements for a petition for rehearing en banc are the same as those for panel rehearing.

 

 

 

https://www.cadc.usc...ks22May2017.pdf

 

The timing requirements are spelled out on page 57

 

If you have any other documents that specify the maximum time allowed for the various steps and you could share those, that would be great.

 

Otherwise:

 

How long after the petition is filed is the Clerk’s Office required to transmit a vote sheet ?  3 days?  14 days?  21  days?  a month ???

 

If no judge asks for a vote within a specified time, and none requests more time to consider the matter, the Clerk will enter an order denying the petition.   What is that specified time?  30 days?  60 days 90 days ?
 
If a judge requests "more time" to consider the matter - how much time are they given?  6 months?  A year?  14 days?
 
If a judge calls for a vote - how long after the call will the judges actually be polled?  
 
If the majority of judges vote for a rehearing, how long after the vote will the rehearing actually be scheduled for ?  45 days, 60 days 90 days?

Mayor Bloomberg himself has recently turned his attention from oversize soft drinks to gun control, confirming the tendency of the Progressive to go from nanny to tyrant.
- N. A. Halkides -
 

 


#154 press1280

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 189 posts
  • Joined: 23-October 11

Posted 28 August 2017 - 12:00 PM

I'll have to find the link. When I looked I don't think there were specific time frames. But, I'd guess if no judge calls for en banc it'll be quick, no reason to delay.

#155 C0untZer0

    Member

  • Members
  • 12,041 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 11

Posted 28 August 2017 - 01:50 PM

Well if its the same as the 9th Cir. it will be 21 days, but it doesn't have to be the same, every Circuit Court makes there own rules.

 

The waiting is the hardest part...


Mayor Bloomberg himself has recently turned his attention from oversize soft drinks to gun control, confirming the tendency of the Progressive to go from nanny to tyrant.
- N. A. Halkides -
 

 


#156 skinnyb82

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,076 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 12

Posted 29 August 2017 - 09:36 AM

The good news is that no judge has called for a vote before the petition had been filed. That's telling. Now it's just a wait. I believe CA7 has a 45 day limit for action regarding an en banc petition. FRAP Rule 35 governs en banc, generally. Circuit Rules govern it specifically, but I see nothing about length of time for consideration of the petition. There MUST BE an unwritten rule that a judge must call for a vote within a specific period of time. They cannot just sit around, wait for a year, then deny or grant. That's justice delayed. Then again, it is the DC Circuit. Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk
NRA Member
SAF Member
C&R License Holder

#157 C0untZer0

    Member

  • Members
  • 12,041 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 11

Posted 29 August 2017 - 09:29 PM

I'm guessing the Chief Judge provides the impetus for moving the process along - unfortunately, that's Garland and I don't know if he'll slow-walk the case. 


Mayor Bloomberg himself has recently turned his attention from oversize soft drinks to gun control, confirming the tendency of the Progressive to go from nanny to tyrant.
- N. A. Halkides -
 

 


#158 transplant

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,394 posts
  • Joined: 14-May 13

Posted 29 August 2017 - 10:20 PM

In my opinion, the slower this case and other federal 2a cases go, the better.

 

Slower means more time for Ginsburg or Breyer to croak.


Hillary Clinton is an "Original Classification Authority" - she knows exactly what she did with her emails.

 

(4) the original classification authority determines that the unauthorized disclosure of the information reasonably could be expected to result in damage to the national security, which includes defense against transnational terrorism, and the original classification authority is able to identify or describe the damage.

 

Sec. 1.2. Classification Levels.

 

(a) Information may be classified at one of the following three levels:

 

(1) “Top Secret” shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.

(2) “Secret” shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause serious damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.

(3) “Confidential” shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.

 

(tt) “Violation” means:

(1) any knowing, willful, or negligent action that could reasonably be expected to result in an unauthorized disclosure of classified information;

 

http://www.thegatewa...on-home-server/


#159 press1280

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 189 posts
  • Joined: 23-October 11

Posted 30 August 2017 - 10:46 AM

That and the fact the case is "good law" and hasn't been vaporized by an en banc grant.

#160 C0untZer0

    Member

  • Members
  • 12,041 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 11

Posted 11 September 2017 - 03:49 PM

Well, they moved to re-hear the case en banc.  Despite the lack of self-imposed rules for a timeline, the DC circuit moved fairly quickly and on August 31st, the parties were notified to file their briefs.

 

 

Attached File  Wrenn.Order.response .pdf   39.13KB   23 downloads

 

 

Also... Everytown For Gun Safety filed an Amicus brief:

 

Attached File  wrenn everytown amicus brief enbanc .pdf   233.51KB   20 downloads

 

 

I believe parties must have their briefs submitted by the 15th

 

 

 

 


Mayor Bloomberg himself has recently turned his attention from oversize soft drinks to gun control, confirming the tendency of the Progressive to go from nanny to tyrant.
- N. A. Halkides -
 

 


#161 transplant

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,394 posts
  • Joined: 14-May 13

Posted 11 September 2017 - 04:31 PM

Name one en banc hearing that went in favor of gun rights.

GO!

Hillary Clinton is an "Original Classification Authority" - she knows exactly what she did with her emails.

 

(4) the original classification authority determines that the unauthorized disclosure of the information reasonably could be expected to result in damage to the national security, which includes defense against transnational terrorism, and the original classification authority is able to identify or describe the damage.

 

Sec. 1.2. Classification Levels.

 

(a) Information may be classified at one of the following three levels:

 

(1) “Top Secret” shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.

(2) “Secret” shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause serious damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.

(3) “Confidential” shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.

 

(tt) “Violation” means:

(1) any knowing, willful, or negligent action that could reasonably be expected to result in an unauthorized disclosure of classified information;

 

http://www.thegatewa...on-home-server/


#162 press1280

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 189 posts
  • Joined: 23-October 11

Posted 11 September 2017 - 04:49 PM

Tyler v. Hillsboro and Binderup v. Sessions, although both were also wins with the 3 judge panels, then turned into very confusing, fractured en banc opinions (but still wins).



#163 skinnyb82

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,076 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 12

Posted 12 September 2017 - 05:51 AM

Tyler v. Hillsboro and Binderup v. Sessions, although both were also wins with the 3 judge panels, then turned into very confusing, fractured en banc opinions (but still wins).

Binderup doesn't count IMO because CA3 initially heard it en banc. The court thought it be wise to hear it en banc the first time around because of the case's (genuine) exceptional importance. Tyler is...yeah, that's the only other case I can think of where the full court reached the same conclusion as the panel.

Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk


NRA Member
SAF Member
C&R License Holder




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users