Decision in Kachalsky LOSS

[press1280]

I can see that good cause can withstand intermediate. Scrutiny. And all though I am new here I am glad to see that they did not try to use rational basis . But in practice as the law is used would there be an equal protection claim. I think we all know how the discretion will likely be used.

Rational basis is a non-starter, although some of these courts' intermediate scrutiny is nothing but rational basis. When the state simply parrots "public safety" with ZERO evidence that a "need" standard cuts down on crime, and then wins their case you know the fix is in.

 

[press1280]

I'm glad we replaced our Attorney General last November. The last one would never have filed this brief.

I'm a little disappointed more states didn't join in. I can understand MD, NY, NJ, exc not in on it, but where's TN, LA, WY, WI, NH(and others)? Maybe those folks ought to start writing their AGs and ask that they sign on to this brief. It'll definitely send a stronger signal to SCOTUS to take the case.

 

[Brooklyn]

Rational basis is a non-starter, although some of these courts' intermediate scrutiny is nothing but rational basis. When the state simply parrots "public safety" with ZERO evidence that a "need" standard cuts down on crime, and then wins their case you know the fix is in.

Yes I know but lip service to intermediate scrutiny gives us a chance.
and courts change over time bad standards are very sticky

i.e. separate but equal...

 

[Elliotte]

There's always a health crisis or a car crash, unfortunately.

Wasn't Kennedy the one many were thinking is most likely to retire from that side of things?

I can't remember where it was quoted, but Kennedy has said he won't retire while Obama is still in office.

 

[jrosenberger]

NY's response to the petition for cert is due today. Anyone know when/where we'll be able to read it? It's been a while since we had a SCOTUS case to follow.

 

[press1280]

NY's response to the petition for cert is due today. Anyone know when/where we'll be able to read it? It's been a while since we had a SCOTUS case to follow.

Maybe tomorrow but the amicus briefs that were already filed didn't appear until a few days after they were filed.

 

[fightinbluhen51]

NY's response to the petition for cert is due today. Anyone know when/where we'll be able to read it? It's been a while since we had a SCOTUS case to follow.

I'll assume that Esq or Krukam will grab it off PACER and post it here when its available.

 

[2ndsupporter]

what exactly does this latest filing mean?

No. 12-845
Title:
Alan Kachalsky, et al., Petitioners
v.
Susan Cacace, et al.
Docketed: January 10, 2013
Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Case Nos.: (11-3642, 11-3962)
Decision Date: November 27, 2012

~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jan 8 2013 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 11, 2013)
Jan 11 2013 Consent to the fiing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioners.
Jan 31 2013 Order extending time to file response to petition to and including March 13, 2013, for all respondents.
Feb 11 2013 Brief amicus curiae of Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence filed.
Feb 11 2013 Brief amicus curiae of American Civil Rights Union filed.
Feb 11 2013 Brief amici curiae of Commonwealth of Virginia, et al. filed.
Feb 11 2013 Brief amicus curiae of National Rifle Association of America, Inc. filed.
Feb 11 2013 Brief amicus curiae of Cato Institute filed.
Feb 11 2013 Brief amici curiae of S.C.O.P.E., Inc., et al. filed.
Feb 11 2013 Brief amicus curiae of Academics for the Second Amendment filed.
Mar 6 2013 Waiver of right of respondent County of Westchester to respond filed.

What is the significance of this?

 

[Kharn]

IIRC it translates to "We're the government, we're busy, their case sucks and you're not likely to be interested in such fishwrap. Call us if you really want to hear from us."

From what I remember the last time it popped up in a case, government entities would be significantly bogged down if they had to respond to every Supreme Court (or appeals court) issue (such as prisoners' tinfoil/amateur/dumb appeals, etc), so the Court lets them waive a response until one of the Justices asks the government to respond to the petition or the Justices may just deny cert to the petition on its own, saving the government the effort of preparing the brief.

 

[Wolverine]

NY State has responded and you can read it here. Westchester County is allowing NY State to lead the charge so the county won't be filing anything. We should be seeing some briefs in support of New York being filed today also.

 

[press1280]

They end up with a contradiction when it comes to open carry. They say on one hand there's no conflict with Moore because there's no blanket prohibition on public carry, but also say if petitioners are challenging the OC ban, that's OK too because of the Statute of Northhampton says bans on public carry are OK?

 

[SirMrManGuy]

Dave Hardy has a good summary of all the amici on his blog...

http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2013/02/amicus_briefs_i_3.php

The history lesson about Big Tim Sullivan in the amici by Academics for 2A is a fascinating read, especially if you like reading about organized crime.

 

[press1280]

The history lesson about Big Tim Sullivan in the amici by Academics for 2A is a fascinating read, especially if you like reading about organized crime.

It definitely is. I hope, along with strong language from SCOTUS warning lower courts not to subject the 2A as a "red headed stepchild", that they expose the history behind the Sullivan Act and Jim Crow in the opinion. It'll definitely make courts and legislatures think twice about passing or upholding similiar laws.

 

[jrosenberger]

"Mar 27 2013 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 12, 2013."

It's interesting to me that there appear to be no amici opposing cert.

When do we find out the outcome of the conference? There are no orders listings in April on the calendar at scotusblog.

 

[Wolverine]

Here is a copy of Gura's response He filed today. Note that Gura mentions he will also be filing a petition for cert. in Woollard.

 

[jrosenberger]

Also, just saw on Gene Hoffman's twitter that petitioners filed a reply to NY's response: http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/kachalsky/Kachalsky-Cert-Petition-reply-2013-03-26.pdf

I just started reading, but here's a good quote so far:
"Respectfully, there is
nothing “heightened” or “intermediate” about the
lower court’s standard of review in Second Amendment cases, which asks only whether the legislature
has proffered some excuse for the law – since guns
are dangerous, apparently any excuse will do – and
demands that challengers carry a burden of disproving the presumption of constitutionality"

 

[press1280]

"Mar 27 2013 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 12, 2013."

It's interesting to me that there appear to be no amici opposing cert.

When do we find out the outcome of the conference? There are no orders listings in April on the calendar at scotusblog.

Should be next business day, April 15

 

[Kharn]

"Mar 27 2013 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 12, 2013."

It's interesting to me that there appear to be no amici opposing cert.

When do we find out the outcome of the conference? There are no orders listings in April on the calendar at scotusblog.

IIRC the court issues orders before each argument day, so we should know by wednesday of that week.

 

[jrosenberger]

The conclusion of Gura's reply:

"The only thing worse than explicitly refusing to
enforce an enumerated constitutional right would be
to declare a right “fundamental” while standing aside
as lower courts render it worthless. "

 

[Patrick]

They could relist for another week or so (not uncommon), but we could well hear that the court takes up this case on the 15th of April.