Snope v Brown fka Bianchi v Frosh - MD AWB

[Euler]

Docket

Petition for certiorari said:

...

The State of Maryland deems scores of common semiautomatic rifle models "assault weapons" -- and bans them outright.

...

Maryland’s ban thus singles out for special disfavor not a recognized type of firearm, but certain features included on some firearms.

...

Maryland dubs a semiautomatic firearm that possesses one of the prohibited features an "assault weapon," but that is nothing more than argument advanced by a political slogan in the guise of a definition.

...

Edited August 28, 2024 at 10:47 AM by mauserme
Updated Topic Title

[Plinkermostly]

 

 

                                      "nothing more than argument advanced by a political slogan"

 

That about sums up most of politics, sadly.

[Euler]

Petition granted, judgment vacated, remanded.

[Texasgrillchef]

We will get a briefing schedule within the next two weeks.

[MrTriple]

On 7/5/2022 at 6:03 PM, Texasgrillchef said:

We will get a briefing schedule within the next two weeks.

 

I'll be interested in seeing what arguments the state brings, particularly the existing Heller standard of, "commonly owned".

[MrTriple]

The way I see it, Bianchi doesn't even need to mention Bruen, since the test for an AWB is whether or not the banned class of weapon is commonly owned.

 

I've seen figures numbering in the millions, which definitely meets the very definition of such, which begs the question of what line of argument Frosh will use.

 

I figure he'll fall back on the old "public safety" argument, perhaps try arguing that this class of weapon is "dangerous," but that begs a couple of questions:

 

*Where in Heller is "public safety" an accepted standard?

*How can you dispute the commonality of so-called "assault weapons" given the available numbers?

*If you do cite Bruen, what historical evidence exists of a categorical ban on an entire class of weapon in the early Founding period?

 

He'll try getting creative, but he doesn't have a lot of wiggle room, if any, to argue in favor of the ban.

[Flynn]

On 7/5/2022 at 6:18 PM, MrTriple said:

 

I'll be interested in seeing what arguments the state brings, particularly the existing Heller standard of, "commonly owned".

 

The courts have been ignoring the 'common use' test established in Miller for many, many decades, even after Heller echoed it again.  I have to feeling the current SCOTUS is done allowing that to happen.

[MrTriple]

On 7/5/2022 at 8:14 PM, Flynn said:

 

The courts have been ignoring the 'common use' test established in Miller for many, many decades, even after Heller echoed it again.  I have to feeling the current SCOTUS is done allowing that to happen.

And by GVR'ing the case, the Supreme Court was likely trying to send a (less than) subtle message about how they feel about an AWB. Whatever judges get this case probably have that thought stuck squarely in the front of their minds.

[Texasgrillchef]

It should be u for a briefing schedule with n the next couple of weeks. The big question is if it all go o district first. Or if it all be decided by a 3 judge circuit panel

[MrTriple]

Looks like the official GVR from SCOTUS dropped yesterday. I guess the order list from July was merely a list, and this is the official order? Perhaps someone can clarify that point.

 

Oral arguments tentatively scheduled for December 6-9. Supplemental brief due August 22nd; supplemental response brief due September 12th; supplemental reply brief permitted by September 22nd.

 

Edited August 2, 2022 at 05:56 PM by MrTriple

[Euler]

On 8/2/2022 at 1:55 PM, MrTriple said:

Looks like the official GVR from SCOTUS dropped yesterday. I guess the order list from July was merely a list, and this is the official order? Perhaps someone can clarify that point.

...

 

Just because the Supreme Court decided to remand the case back in June doesn't mean official notice was sent down immediately.

 

"The wheels of justice grind slowly, but they do grind."

[Texasgrillchef]

Pushed to December for oral argument intentionally by the  appeals court to delay things.

[MrTriple]

Oral arguments are today, 8:30 AM Central/9:30 AM Eastern. You can tune in here:

 

 

[THE KING]

On 12/6/2022 at 12:18 AM, MrTriple said:

Oral arguments are today, 8:30 AM Central/9:30 AM Eastern. You can tune in here:

 

 

Does anyone know what time the Bianchi case will be heard.  

[Molly B.]

On 12/6/2022 at 9:44 AM, THE KING said:

Does anyone know what time the Bianchi case will be heard.  

 

 

Live now. started at -:19?

[THE KING]

Just listened to the oral argument.  I think it's favorable for Bianchi. 

[MrTriple]

Arguments were interesting. I wish the plaintiff's lawyer had done more to press the fact that self defense isn't the only lawful purpose for owning a gun, but the judges did come back to that during his rebuttal.

 

Where Maryland really got hammered was on their argument that only weapons actually used for self defense (that is, actually used in a defensive shooting) are protected, but one of the judges really hit back on that point by saying that merely keeping a gun for self defense itself constitutes an act of self defense. They also, again, would later go on to clarify that non-defensive uses are covered, too.

 

Traxler was simply off the rails. Clear that she'll side with Maryland, but the other two judges sounded like they were siding against the state.

 

Assuming they strike the ban, the next question is, "what's next?" Will Maryland try requesting an en banc panel? They won't appeal to the Supreme Court if they lose.

[Tvandermyde]

here is my quick recap

 

Traxler was not on the panel he was replaced with Neimeyer who was the older crankyier  guy who really went after the state over Kolbe

 

 

[THE KING]

Any idea when an opinion will come out from the court? 

[Upholder]

 

[Flynn]

On 1/10/2023 at 10:47 PM, Upholder said:

 

 

The continuation of the quote found in the article

 

Quote

But lawmakers should leave no stone unturned in their quest to keep these weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them.

 

They have officially pole vaulted past "weapons of war" to WMDs!!! 🤡🌎

[Euler]

On 1/11/2023 at 1:17 AM, Flynn said:

...

They have officially pole vaulted past "weapons of war" to WMDs!!!

 

None of my nuclear warheads have buffer tubes. None of my sarin cannisters have thumbhole stocks. Is that a loophole?

[Flynn]

On 1/11/2023 at 2:02 AM, Euler said:

 

None of my nuclear warheads have buffer tubes. None of my sarin cannisters have thumbhole stocks. Is that a loophole?

 

You should be golden then, as long as your WMDs don't have one of those shoulder things that goes up or a high capacity clip.

[springfield shooter]

"Unhelpful in this regard" apparently means that SCOTUS has ruled that pesky Constitution means what it says....not what some gun-grabber wants it to say.

[davel501]

So who wants to guess on a the date this decision drops? I'm going with by 1/31 mostly because I want to hear something by the end of January., 😁

[Upholder]

.

Edited January 20, 2023 at 03:18 AM by Upholder
wrong case. removed.

[davel501]

 

[Upholder]

As predicted, the 4th Circuit has decided to take this case En Banc before the panel was able to issue a decision.

 

 

[Upholder]

 

 

[Upholder]