[Barnett v. Raoul (3:23-cv-00209) (S.D. Ill. 2023) - NSSF Gun/Mag Ban]

Jesus, the first sentence is interest balancing.

[Viramontes v. Cook County - SAF challenges Cook Co. Weapon ban]

Case starts at 2hr 00min

[Davis v Yenchko (FOID revocations)]

You can have your rights back, after you spend a wealthy sum to an attorney of your choice.

[Barnett v. Raoul (3:23-cv-00209) (S.D. Ill. 2023) - NSSF Gun/Mag Ban]

Just ignore him.

 

If all he does is reaction videos, which is basically content theft. He's on the lowest spectrum of youtubers.

[Schoenthal v. Raoul - Plaintiffs Win Summary Judgement Against Carry Ban on Public Transportation]

"...there was no threat to the community."

 

That's a pretty bold statement when a gunman on the lose randomly killed 4 people.

[Doss v US - felon in possession]

I wish right wing states/courts would pass and challenge laws such as awbs.

 

Have Texas make an awb that goes into effect in 100years, give a weak defense for challenges then keep appealing until it gets to SCOTUS.

[Doss v US - felon in possession]

Anyone else think these cases with very poor facts are being rammed through to attempt to chip away at Bruen.

[US v Rahimi - Domestic violence restraining orders]

On 6/21/2024 at 7:27 PM, davel501 said:

 

You see the state returning the weapons too? 

 

Sounds like a 4th amendment case that will allow SCOTUS from having to rule on 2nd issues

[US v Rahimi - Domestic violence restraining orders]

I doubt any meaningful red flag law challenge will make it to SCOTUS within the lifetime of any of the current judges(or mine). If any sympathetic red flag recipient makes it to a significant legal challenge point the state will just moot the case by granting their rights back. The only way a challenge will make it's way up is if the plaintiff is a Rahimi type character. That Rahimi 2 character will have a hard time finding a champion.

[Cargill v Garland: U.S. Supreme Court rules ATF bumpstock ban unconstitutional]

Anyone smart enough reading the decision can tell how this will impact the legally gray FRT, Binary's, and Super Safety's?

[Cargill v Garland: U.S. Supreme Court rules ATF bumpstock ban unconstitutional]

If I'm understanding this correctly, bump stocks can be banned at the state level. Those bans then could only be challenged on 2nd amendment grounds.

 

I anticipate more blue states passing bans.

 

Anyone know which states already have bans on the books?

[Cargill v Garland: U.S. Supreme Court rules ATF bumpstock ban unconstitutional]

On 6/14/2024 at 10:09 AM, steveTA84 said:

 

 

I'll giggle when I read McGlynn's decision using a quote from Sotomayor.

[Cargill v Garland: U.S. Supreme Court rules ATF bumpstock ban unconstitutional]

Only took ~7 years to fix this issue. The bar for injunctions being granted in these types of cases needs to be significantly lowered.

[Robert Hunter Biden Indicted]

Guilty on all 3 charges

[US v Rahimi - Domestic violence restraining orders]

What a weird, tenuous tie in.

 

But I guess when you need the clicks and Trump articles are proven to deliver, anything is on the table.

[Davis v Yenchko (FOID revocations)]

I love it, the government can violate any of your rights so long as it's on a shorter time basis than a court can adjudicate.

[Snope v Brown fka Bianchi v Frosh - MD AWB]

On 5/20/2024 at 10:14 AM, MrTriple said:

So apparently I wasn't aware that en banc oral arguments were already heard back in March. A recording can be found at this link:

 

https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/OAarchive/mp3/21-1255-20240320.mp3

 

Might be useful to listen to in the wake of the denial of cert on the appeal.

 

This is a hilarious listen.

 

M16 leaves nothing of its [paper] target.

M16 shreds the human body.

 

M16=AR15

[Robert Hunter Biden Indicted]

If he gets convicted for the gun charge 2nd Amendment groups should offer to pay for his appeal.

[Barnett v. Raoul (3:23-cv-00209) (S.D. Ill. 2023) - NSSF Gun/Mag Ban]

I wonder if SCOTUS could have a blanket ban on a judge. IE any ruling coming from them automatically gets nullified, and retried.

[US v Carbajal-Flores - Undocumented immigrant in possession]

How long does the government have to appeal this ruling?

 

I hope they do!!!

[US v Carbajal-Flores - Undocumented immigrant in possession]

Was he also charged for not having a FOID or only for the federal statutes?

 

If not can he still be charged for not having a FOID?

 

Either way this is good, shame the ruling was narrow and only applied in this one off case.

[Barnett v. Raoul (3:23-cv-00209) (S.D. Ill. 2023) - NSSF Gun/Mag Ban]

I don't know which cases you a referring too. Seems like those discussions should be taken to their respective thread.

[Miller v. Bonta, California AWB case]

Finally someone corrected the argument of self-defense as the only lawful use of a firearm. We'll see if it fell on deaf ears.

Gets good around 35:00.

 

I think the 2nd Amendment lawyer has an uphill battle, but I think he did well.

[Barnett v. Raoul (3:23-cv-00209) (S.D. Ill. 2023) - NSSF Gun/Mag Ban]

I didn't watch the video but this can be very good for us in the long run. Either way this will go to SCOTUS ( whether or not they take it up will be unknown). But if it does get into SCOTUS they should rectify how this will work with US vs Miller which says the military test is the opposite, only weapons used for military purposes are protected by the 2nd. (That ruling was seriously flawed then and a ruling in the opposite today might force SCOTUS to rectify them) Which can then be used to challenge the NFA.

[Bevis v Naperville - AWB]

On 12/6/2023 at 6:41 PM, steveTA84 said:

Lol 

Did the 1990's AWB get constitutionally challenged?

 

Furthermore if it was challenged to SCOTUS and found constitutional then, are they claiming that SCOTUS doesn't have the authority to overrule previous SCOTUS rulings?