Judge Scullin Grants 90 day Stay to D.C. on Firearms Carry in the District

[Hipshot Percussion]

In AmmoLand this morning...

 

c2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch

Arizona - -(Ammoland.com)- Judge Scullin has granted a 90 day temporary stay on enforcement of the injunction placed on the District in the Palmer v. D.C. case.

For a brief period, people were able to legally carry handguns in the District of Columbia. Except for government agents, this has not been the case for 37 years for concealed carry, and 70 years for open carry.

The District council is in recess, and will not reconvene until 15 September, 2014. That is 48 days. That leaves 42 days, or six weeks to pass the necessary legislation. In the meantime, legislation authored by Representative Massie, which would cut funding for enforcement of the D.C. gun laws, has passed the house.

Thus the government of the District of Columbia is under double pressure to conform their law to the Constitution. If they do not do so, Judge Scully is under no obligation to renew the stay.

I would have preferred that the injunction remain in place. We would quickly determine if the D.C. crime rate would rise or fall. All previous evidence is that it would fall.

Now we wait until the 22th of October. No extensions should be given. The people of the nation have had their rights suppressed for far too long.

In reality, there is no need for new legislation. The registration process in the District is far more burdensome than obtaining a permit to carry concealed in nearly all the other states. The rules that the City established, published by Chief Lanier under the injunction, would work perfectly well. The District could then work to reduce the ridiculous burdens imposed on its residents by the registration scheme.

Update: I have read the stay. It is explicitly granted in order for the District to craft legislation, not for an appeal. Both sides will submit further arguments.

 

[wtr100]

so will DC get a better bill in 90 days than we did in 6 months?

 

Even with a 'good' bill DC would be a nightmare to carry in - unless of course you have a diplomatic pass port

[limac333]

so will DC get a better bill in 90 days than we did in 6 months?

 

Even with a 'good' bill DC would be a nightmare to carry in - unless of course you have a diplomatic pass port

I have low expectations for a DC carry bill. Basically what you would get if Chicago alone was allowed to write ours.

[skinnyb82]

I think they're just dragging posterior so they have time to draft a notice of appeal. Scullin didn't stay it pending appeal but that doesn't mean D.C. won't thumb its nose at him and appeal. He'll probably lift the stay if they appeal after saying "We want 90 days to write a new law."

 

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2

[solareclipse2]

I think they're just dragging posterior so they have time to draft a notice of appeal. Scullin didn't stay it pending appeal but that doesn't mean D.C. won't thumb its nose at him and appeal. He'll probably lift the stay if they appeal after saying "We want 90 days to write a new law."

 

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2

 

They want 90 days to write the law the same way IL did, because nobody's done this before and there is no possible way this could be streamlined.

[Tango7]

Dare I ask who appointed this fine bulwark of enumerated rights?

[Tango7]

[

They want 90 days to write the law the same way IL did, because nobody's done this before and there is no possible way this could be streamlined.

 

Of course. Haven't you heard? The Scientific Method doesn't apply in political chambers.

[defaultdotxbe]

Dare I ask who appointed this fine bulwark of enumerated rights?

G.H.W. Bush

 

Personally I'll take a favorable mandate and a stay over an unfavorable ruling any day of the week

[Mr. Fife]

He'll probably lift the stay if they appeal after saying "We want 90 days to write a new law."

 

I doubt it.

[skinnyb82]

You think that federal judges are big fans of parties who outright lie to them in briefs filed with the court? No, they take attorneys at their word and asking for a day stay to rewrite the law, then proceeding to use that to file an appeal, that's sanctionable conduct (for filing a frivolous motion) since the stay was granted because Scullin took D.C. at its word. The District asked for 180 days citing Gura's statement they'd be willing to play ball with a 90 day stay, Scullin granted the 90 day stay. Gura and his clients told the district that they are unopposed to a 90 day stay. Simple. This is procedural. It does not mean there is some sort of conspiracy to screw anyone.

 

(Edited out huge rant)

 

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2

[Hap]

There are plenty of systems of government in which one man makes a decision and it is implemented immediately without further discussion. I'm pretty sure none of us would want to live under any of them.

[TyGuy]

Depends on who I am in that system.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[GAS3987]

There are still plenty of places we can't carry... California, New York (NYC for their residents), etc. Hopefully cases like this in DC will have positive effects elsewhere, but I'm not holding my breath.