Supreme Court remits MD assault weapons ban back to lower courts in light of Bruen vs. NY ruling

[BurkeM]

AGAIN...It's the same link posted on the previous page in post 1657.

And the Date for the Oral Arguments is the same.

Why do you keep posting stuff that has already been posted?

FILED: March 6, 2024

That's today.

 

[dblas]

FILED: March 6, 2024

That's today.

It's the same ORDER and REQUIREMENT as the original, you even copy/pasted the original.
You left out the very last sentence with regards to submitting 16 copies.
What you posted was the exact same wording as the original and made it look EXACTLY like the original order.

YOU SCREWED UP THE POST, OWN IT.

 

[Inigoes]

dblas,

Chillax

Burke is trying to be helpful

 

[pcfixer]

dblas,

Chillax

Burke is trying to be helpful

 

[BurkeM]

It's the same ORDER and REQUIREMENT as the original, you even copy/pasted the original.
You left out the very last sentence with regards to submitting 16 copies.
What you posted was the exact same wording as the original and made it look EXACTLY like the original order.

YOU SCREWED UP THE POST, OWN IT.

It was posted as a CORRECTED COPY. Which means the wording changed.

Have a nice day.

 

[dblas]

It was posted as a CORRECTED COPY. Which means the wording changed.

Have a nice day.

And you left out the corrected verbiage when you did your copy and paste.

You failed.

 

[dblas]

dblas,

Chillax

Burke is trying to be helpful

By copy pasting the original order and saying it was the updated order?

I don't think so.

 

[BurkeM]

By copy pasting the original order and saying it was the updated order?

I don't think so.

No, I posted the LATEST order. I bow to you as the Provost of the thread.

 

[adit]

 

[pcfixer]

Search

Mar 07 2024

Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 12, 2024.

Huh! wonder if this will affect the Orals on 20 March?

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_calendars/MonthlyArgumentCalMarch2024.pdf

Maybe I missed something?

 

[pcfixer]

Latest update:

This case is scheduled for oral argument on March 20, 2024.


The parties are directed to file supplemental briefs specifically addressing the
following issue:


Whether the inquiry into a weapon’s “common use” occurs at the first
step or second step of the framework articulated in New York State Rifle
& Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, 142 S. Ct. 2111 (2022). In
answering that question, the parties are to address who has the burden
of establishing a weapon’s “common use.”


The parties may submit simultaneous briefs, not exceeding ten pages, on or
before Tuesday, March 12, 2024.

Okay....got it UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

 

[Inigoes]

Search

Mar 07 2024

Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 12, 2024.

Huh! wonder if this will affect the Orals on 20 March?

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_calendars/MonthlyArgumentCalMarch2024.pdf

Maybe I missed something?

NRA v. Vullo is up in the next couple weeks, which is a 1A Case

Does the First Amendment allow a government regulator to threaten regulated entities with adverse regulatory actions if they do business with a controversial speaker, as a consequence of (a) the government's own hostility to the speaker's viewpoint or (b) a perceived "general backlash" against the speaker's advocacy?

https://www.supremecourt.gov/qp/22-00842qp.pdf

 

[rbird7282]

Search

Mar 07 2024

Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 12, 2024.

Huh! wonder if this will affect the Orals on 20 March?

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_calendars/MonthlyArgumentCalMarch2024.pdf

Maybe I missed something?

I really wish they’d stop granting every fvcking extension


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Steel Hunter]

I really wish they’d stop granting every fvcking extension


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

While I completely agree, this was also entirely expected. It would have been highly unusual for SCOTUS to deny the extension given they already (edit made here) had the chance to hear the case, but GVR'd it, and are now waiting for 4th circuit en banc to happen which just so happens to be within the time period filings were requested.

Should 4th Circuit en banc (probably inevitably) produce a blatantly fabricated result, SCOTUS will be ready to slap the 4th circuit back to reality within the next term.

 

[Some Guy]

I really wish they’d stop granting every fvcking extension


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Same.

 

[dblas]

While I completely agree, this was also entirely expected. It would have been highly unusual for SCOTUS to deny the extension given they already heard the case, GVR'd it, and are now waiting for 4th circuit en banc to happen which just so happens to be within the time period filings were requested.

Should 4th Circuit en banc (probably inevitably) produce a blatantly fabricated result, SCOTUS will be ready to slap the 4th circuit back to reality within the next term.

SCOTUS did NOT in fact hear the case, they held it, and other cases, pending the outcome of Bruen. They then accepted the case, GVR'd it and told the lower court to rehear it based on the new jurisprudence from Bruen.

The 4th Circus reheard the case over a year ago, and without a ruling from the 3 judge panel, issued the en banc requirement, and here we are.

 

[gtodave]

dblas,

Chillax

Burke is trying to be helpful

+1

 

[Steel Hunter]

SCOTUS did NOT in fact hear the case, they held it, and other cases, pending the outcome of Bruen. They then accepted the case, GVR'd it and told the lower court to rehear it based on the new jurisprudence from Bruen.

The 4th Circus reheard the case over a year ago, and without a ruling from the 3 judge panel, issued the en banc requirement, and here we are.

Correct I should have been more careful with the wording there. I knew what I meant to say and it didn't come out right.

 

[dblas]

Correct I should have been more careful with the wording there. I knew what I meant to say and it didn't come out right.

No worries.

 

[BurkeM]

I can almost see Justice Thomas anticipating his next slapdown.