Molly B. Posted March 28, 2023 at 01:22 AM Author Share Posted March 28, 2023 at 01:22 AM So this was a federal district judge denying a motion for preliminary injunction, correct? I believe this will be appealed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted March 28, 2023 at 01:27 AM Share Posted March 28, 2023 at 01:27 AM On 3/27/2023 at 9:22 PM, Molly B. said: So this was a federal district judge denying a motion for preliminary injunction, correct? I believe this will be appealed. Correct, the decision is only a denial of a preliminary injunction. The case itself has not been heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Porkchop Posted March 28, 2023 at 02:17 AM Share Posted March 28, 2023 at 02:17 AM On 3/27/2023 at 8:04 PM, Evil Porkchop said: At some point SCOTUS just needs to say that any law banning, firearms, accessories, parts etc are unconstitutional, period, end of story. These lower courts, twisting themselves all sorts of ways to try and ignore Brown. Err Bruen... Stupid autocorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
springfield shooter Posted March 28, 2023 at 02:54 AM Share Posted March 28, 2023 at 02:54 AM On 3/27/2023 at 8:27 PM, Euler said: Correct, the decision is only a denial of a preliminary injunction. The case itself has not been heard. "Thanks", to you and Molly both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcable2 Posted March 28, 2023 at 03:36 AM Share Posted March 28, 2023 at 03:36 AM The judge still believes they can use interest balancing. Judges like this really need to be removed from the bench. They cannot even follow simple clear instructions from the supreme Court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fenris Posted March 29, 2023 at 01:50 AM Share Posted March 29, 2023 at 01:50 AM On 3/27/2023 at 7:13 PM, gunuser17 said: Delaware District Court Ruling today: https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/6644/attachments/original/1679952127/DSSA_v_DSHS_58_Opinion.pdf?1679952127 Appears to be a garbage decision that ignores the clear test of Heller, Bruen and much more. The 2nd amendment is not limited to self defense and in common use is sort of opposite of unusual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dumak_from_arfcom Posted March 29, 2023 at 06:55 PM Share Posted March 29, 2023 at 06:55 PM On 3/28/2023 at 8:50 PM, fenris said: Appears to be a garbage decision that ignores the clear test of Heller, Bruen and much more. The 2nd amendment is not limited to self defense and in common use is sort of opposite of unusual. On 3/27/2023 at 10:36 PM, jcable2 said: The judge still believes they can use interest balancing. Judges like this really need to be removed from the bench. They cannot even follow simple clear instructions from the supreme Court. It is the twisted logic they are using to get around the clear wording of Bruen. In California they tried coming up with historic analogs, and all they submitted were racist laws. California used them with the caveat that they don't endorse the racist laws, but they are there and were enforced at the time. They must have figured out that wasn't going to work. So they have come up with this twisted interpretation of Bruen + Heller. That is the historic analogs demanded by the Bruen test are not about the laws in 1791, they are about the guns in common use in 1791. So since semi-autos weren't in common use in 1791 they aren't covered by Bruen. The Delaware judge seemed to add an additional provision to this, and ruled something to the effect of... even if Bruen applied to semi-autos, there are more modern laws that do regulate semi-autos - and the more modern laws should also be considered historic. And so, since Bruen doesn't apply, they can interest balance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Q Public Posted March 29, 2023 at 09:24 PM Share Posted March 29, 2023 at 09:24 PM (edited) The SC will tire of this crap and it will cost them in the long run. I think they might have let some smaller things slide, but ignoring, or willful violation of points made clear are going to put them in a foul mood when it comes to dealing with future cases. These political jurists/attorneys have made a huge mistake with this approach. JQ Edited March 29, 2023 at 09:43 PM by John Q Public Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted March 29, 2023 at 09:39 PM Share Posted March 29, 2023 at 09:39 PM On 3/29/2023 at 4:24 PM, John Q Public said: I think the SC will tire of this crap and it will cost them in the long run. I think they might have let some smaller things slide, but ignoring, or willful violation of points made clear are going to put them in a foul mood when it comes to dealing with future cases. I think, political jurists/attorneys have made a huge mistake with this approach. I believe you are correct, Bruen was the white glove slap for ignoring Heller and putting the inferior courts on notice, I can't see the Supreme Court continuing to entertain inferior courts flat out defying them for much longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted March 31, 2023 at 04:46 PM Share Posted March 31, 2023 at 04:46 PM “Bidet” appointed judge strikes down MN under 21 carry ban Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted March 31, 2023 at 07:42 PM Share Posted March 31, 2023 at 07:42 PM On 3/31/2023 at 12:46 PM, steveTA84 said: “Bidet” appointed judge strikes down MN under 21 carry ban BREAKING: Worth v. Harrington (D. MN): Judge strikes down Minnesota's under-21 carry ban, saying the state failed to show that it "is consistent with the nation’s history and tradition of firearm regulations as required by Bruen." https://t.co/fqzRt38Z2q pic.twitter.com/6dyY6v3j3W — Rob Romano (@2Aupdates) March 31, 2023 The case is Worth v Harrington. Minnesota is in the 8th US Circuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted April 1, 2023 at 10:45 PM Author Share Posted April 1, 2023 at 10:45 PM Added: Minnesota U.S. District Court - Worth v. Harrington struck down a state restriction limiting handgun carry permits to those over age 21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted April 5, 2023 at 01:05 PM Author Share Posted April 5, 2023 at 01:05 PM Added: Third Judicial Circuit Court, Madison Co., IL - Davis v Yenchko - Judge Donald Foster ruled suspending FOID cards for persons charged but not convicted of a felony is unconstitutional. Enjoins ISP from suspending FOID cards for person charged with a felony but not convicted. 3/10/2023. I expect this to case to be appealed by the state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted May 12, 2023 at 12:51 PM Author Share Posted May 12, 2023 at 12:51 PM Another U.S. District Court - this time in Virginia - A federal judge Robert Payne has struck down a law barring the sale of handguns to adults under the age of 21 as unconstitutional. - John Corey Fraser, 20, along with several other plaintiffs, challenged the constitutionality of the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the associated regulations from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. . . .5/10/2023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted June 7, 2023 at 08:24 PM Author Share Posted June 7, 2023 at 08:24 PM Updated Range v Lombardo - 6/6/2023 U.S. Third Circuit Appellate Court en banc ruling in favor of Mr. Range. Reversed and remanded back to lower court. Quote We agree with Range that, despite his false statement conviction, he remains among “the people” protected by the Second Amendment. And because the Government did not carry its burden of showing that our Nation’s history and tradition of firearm regulation support disarming Range, we will reverse and remand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted June 7, 2023 at 10:31 PM Share Posted June 7, 2023 at 10:31 PM On 6/7/2023 at 3:24 PM, Molly B. said: Updated Range v Lombardo - 6/6/2023 U.S. Third Circuit Appellate Court en banc ruling in favor of Mr. Range. Reversed and remanded back to lower court. And as pointed out in another thread, the gateway to challenge MULTIPLE state and federal laws is now open Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted August 30, 2023 at 09:26 PM Author Share Posted August 30, 2023 at 09:26 PM 8/2/2023: United States v. Perez-Gallan, Accordingly, Perez-Gallan's motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/22/22-51019.0.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted August 30, 2023 at 10:17 PM Share Posted August 30, 2023 at 10:17 PM On 8/30/2023 at 4:26 PM, Molly B. said: 8/2/2023: United States v. Perez-Gallan, Accordingly, Perez-Gallan's motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/22/22-51019.0.pdf The opening paragraph is IMO worth a post of its own... Quote Before Bruen, the Second Amendment looked like an abandoned cabin in the woods. A knot of vines, weeds, and roots, left unkempt for decades, crawling up the cabin’s sides as if pulling it under the earth. Firearm regulations are that overgrowth. Starting with the Federal Firearms Act in 1938, laws were passed with little—if any—consideration given to their constitutionality. That is, until the Supreme Court intervened in Bruen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IH8IL Posted August 31, 2023 at 04:12 AM Share Posted August 31, 2023 at 04:12 AM On 8/30/2023 at 5:17 PM, Flynn said: The opening paragraph is IMO worth a post of its own... Too bad the people in gov don’t care Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTHunter Posted September 1, 2023 at 03:40 AM Share Posted September 1, 2023 at 03:40 AM On 8/30/2023 at 11:12 PM, IH8IL said: Too bad the people in gov don’t care They are only a small percentage of the antis out there. Even more are in the general population having been misled/misinformed BY the "elitists" in the government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted September 1, 2023 at 04:54 AM Share Posted September 1, 2023 at 04:54 AM On 8/31/2023 at 10:40 PM, JTHunter said: They are only a small percentage of the antis out there. Even more are in the general population having been misled/misinformed BY the "elitists" in the government. I agree that there is only a small percentage of devoted antis out there, but the real problem we face is how strong the public interest argument is to many more and how much they are willing to give up and sacrifice their rights over feelings and emotions... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTHunter Posted September 3, 2023 at 02:07 AM Share Posted September 3, 2023 at 02:07 AM There was a very interesting piece on the PBS Weekend News this evening about the number of shooting clubs for teens has exploded over the last few years. Oddly enough, for PBS, it was a fairly well-balanced story where they pointed out how these clubs are helping teens to not only handle firearms safely but to concentrate and focus on a specific task. This seems to carryover into their classwork as well, enabling them to be better students. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallbore Posted September 3, 2023 at 01:20 PM Share Posted September 3, 2023 at 01:20 PM On 8/31/2023 at 10:40 PM, JTHunter said: They are only a small percentage of the antis out there. Even more are in the general population having been misled/misinformed BY the "elitists" in the government. That small percentage is a high percentage of teachers especially administrators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrTriple Posted September 7, 2023 at 05:06 PM Share Posted September 7, 2023 at 05:06 PM On 8/31/2023 at 11:54 PM, Flynn said: I agree that there is only a small percentage of devoted antis out there, but the real problem we face is how strong the public interest argument is to many more and how much they are willing to give up and sacrifice their rights over feelings and emotions... The public interest argument is weaker now than in the past. Combined with the fact that most support for gun control is very soft and non-committal at best (and how insane the gun control movement has become) these "public interest" arguments are really starting to sound unhinged and out of touch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRE Posted September 10, 2023 at 02:36 PM Share Posted September 10, 2023 at 02:36 PM On 8/31/2023 at 11:54 PM, Flynn said: I agree that there is only a small percentage of devoted antis out there, but the real problem we face is how strong the public interest argument is to many more and how much they are willing to give up and sacrifice their rights over feelings and emotions... The clearest evidence of the greater public interest is the spike in gun ownership in 2020. And it wasn’t because of a sudden increase in people who wanted to go hunting with a shotgun. When the you-know-what hit the fan, the realization of the importance of exercising the fundamental right of self defense kicked in. The problem going forward is the short term memory issue the public in general has, and how quickly many forget how they felt that summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted September 10, 2023 at 03:13 PM Author Share Posted September 10, 2023 at 03:13 PM On 9/10/2023 at 9:36 AM, MRE said: The problem going forward is the short term memory issue the public in general has, and how quickly many forget how they felt that summer. I agree 100% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragsbo Posted September 10, 2023 at 10:07 PM Share Posted September 10, 2023 at 10:07 PM On 9/10/2023 at 9:36 AM, MRE said: The clearest evidence of the greater public interest is the spike in gun ownership in 2020. And it wasn’t because of a sudden increase in people who wanted to go hunting with a shotgun. When the you-know-what hit the fan, the realization of the importance of exercising the fundamental right of self defense kicked in. The problem going forward is the short term memory issue the public in general has, and how quickly many forget how they felt that summer. The short memory and the fact the anti's use all emotional arguments to pull on the heart strings when they KNOW they don't have any facts to back anything up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now