Cargill v Garland (5th Circuit Bump Stock Case)

[jcutonilli]

The 5th Circuit has taken Cargill v Garland en banc (full court). The oral arguments have been scheduled for 13 Sept.

Court and Special Hearings Calendars

Cargill has filed a supplemental brief

https://nclalegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Cargill-v-Garland-5th-Cir-Supplemental-Brief.pdf

They did not cite the WV v EPA decision in their supplemental brief.

 

[Allen65]

The 5th Circuit has taken Cargill v Garland en banc (full court). The oral arguments have been scheduled for 13 Sept.

Court and Special Hearings Calendars

Cargill has filed a supplemental brief

https://nclalegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Cargill-v-Garland-5th-Cir-Supplemental-Brief.pdf

They did not cite the WV v EPA decision in their supplemental brief.

So it comes down to Rule of Lenity and Standard Statutory Construction vs. Chevron Deference and Gunz R Bad, M'Kay.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

The 5th Circuit has taken Cargill v Garland en banc (full court). The oral arguments have been scheduled for 13 Sept.

Court and Special Hearings Calendars

Cargill has filed a supplemental brief

https://nclalegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Cargill-v-Garland-5th-Cir-Supplemental-Brief.pdf

They did not cite the WV v EPA decision in their supplemental brief.

I haven’t had a chance to read the case.

Are they fighting on 2A, 14a reasons or on Chevron deference?

 

[jcutonilli]

I haven’t had a chance to read the case.

Are they fighting on 2A, 14a reasons or on Chevron deference?

This case is like the Guedes (DC Circuit), GOA (6th Circuit), and Aposhian (10th Circuit). Aposhian and GOA have cert petitions at SCOTUS with Aposhian being rescheduled 20 times.

They all are based on an incorrect interpretation and the rule of lenity vs Chevron deference.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

This case is like the Guedes (DC Circuit), GOA (6th Circuit), and Aposhian (10th Circuit). Aposhian and GOA have cert petitions at SCOTUS with Aposhian being rescheduled 20 times.

They all are based on an incorrect interpretation and the rule of lenity vs Chevron deference.

Yep Goa and Aposhian are scheduled again for the September 28th conference hearing. I as Well as many others are wondering what they are waiting on. Is there another bump stock case that is better suited to being granted Petition for oral arguments? I think there probably is. Which case it is, is hard to say.

They are very picky about which cases that they actually take especially when they have multiple similar cases to accept. Details in the case are key. As well as WHO the petitioners are as well.

One of the reasons they wanted NYSPrA v Bruen, instead of Young, or even the NJ or MD case is they were itching to give NY a slap after they mooted their case the previous year.

I do know it is NOT good when you piss SCOTUS off. Never a good thing.

Now that being said, and the fact that their are a few other bump stock cases, it will be interesting to see which one they will accept. However a couple of Bump stock cases are on hold pending the GOA, and Aposhian.

We truthfully won’t know anything about what will happen at SCOTUS level until later this year, or even next.

 

[jcutonilli]

Yep Goa and Aposhian are scheduled again for the September 28th conference hearing. I as Well as many others are wondering what they are waiting on. Is there another bump stock case that is better suited to being granted Petition for oral arguments? I think there probably is. Which case it is, is hard to say.

They are very picky about which cases that they actually take especially when they have multiple similar cases to accept. Details in the case are key. As well as WHO the petitioners are as well.

One of the reasons they wanted NYSPrA v Bruen, instead of Young, or even the NJ or MD case is they were itching to give NY a slap after they mooted their case the previous year.

I do know it is NOT good when you piss SCOTUS off. Never a good thing.

Now that being said, and the fact that their are a few other bump stock cases, it will be interesting to see which one they will accept. However a couple of Bump stock cases are on hold pending the GOA, and Aposhian.

We truthfully won’t know anything about what will happen at SCOTUS level until later this year, or even next.

Technically neither GOA or Aposhian have been scheduled for the long conference (28 Sept). Both are based on Preliminary Injunctions so I suspect they will not take either case based on the dissent in Guedes. The EPA case WV v EPA did not get released until 30 June, which was after the cleanup conference (29 June). They may be waiting for the next conference to say something related to that case. They may also be waiting to see if the DC circuit does anything with Guedes before deciding what to do with these cases. Rescheduling 20 times seems like they are waiting for something. Time will eventually reveal what that may be.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

Technically neither GOA or Aposhian have been scheduled for the long conference (28 Sept). Both are based on Preliminary Injunctions so I suspect they will not take either case based on the dissent in Guedes. The EPA case WV v EPA did not get released until 30 June, which was after the cleanup conference (29 June). They may be waiting for the next conference to say something related to that case. They may also be waiting to see if the DC circuit does anything with Guedes before deciding what to do with these cases. Rescheduling 20 times seems like they are waiting for something. Time will eventually reveal what that may be.

Exactly…. They are obviously waiting on something. If they were just going to always deny it without a disent they would ave done so ages ago.

So there is a reason. Same with the GOA. Now sure they haven’t rescheduled or held that one for very long. But they had plenty of time to just deny it at the cleanup conference as well, they could have denied both at cleanup conference. Very easily. However they didn’t, and there is a reason for it. There is another case in the pipeline, that will have some impact on these 2 cases. Which case that is, is only speculation.

We will know something for sure one way or the other before the end of the year. That I feel is certain.

I also believe that they aren’t very happy with the ATF running a much and making the new rules that they are making either. So they are wanting to do something about that. I have a theory that they just haven’t figured out what case to use as the vehicle to put a stop to the ATF doing what it’s doing.

Again there is a reason why it’s been rescheduled so many times.

 

[jcutonilli]

The amicus briefs have been filed. They are attached

 

[HaveBlue]

Nice job @jcutonilli !

 

[motorcoachdoug]

WELL DONE!!!

 

[Blacksmith101]

Good Brief!

 

[jcutonilli]

The oral arguments for this en banc case will be tomorrow. There are two cases beginning a 9 am Central. This case is the second case so it should start around 10 am Central 11 am Eastern. The audio link appears to be https://5thcircuit.streamguys1.com/enbanc

 

[HaveBlue]

I’ll be listening!

 

[press1280]

Perhaps those other cases at SCOTUS are being relisted because they want to see what happens with this case?

 

[jcutonilli]

Perhaps those other cases at SCOTUS are being relisted because they want to see what happens with this case?

I think they were relisted because that what happens with cases that were rescheduled at the end of the last term. We will see if they keep rescheduling these cases

 

[HaveBlue]

The plaintiffs attorney sucks at explaining this. Thankfully, The justices seem to be friendly and are frequently throwing him softballs.

 

[HaveBlue]

Fortunately the gov attorney seems (and admits) to knowing even less.

edit: The judges are 500% more prepared that the gov attorney.

 

[jcutonilli]

Reversed and remanded!

 

[annihilation-time]

Hot damn

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

 

[Kharn]

13 to 3.
Holy crap.