Plinkey
Active Member
iPhone Report.
Looking forward to the full (non-iphone) writeup.
iPhone Report.
Looking forward to the full (non-iphone) writeup.
http://www.mdd.uscourts.gov/publications/Forms/TranscriptOrderInstructions.pdf
That should get you in the right direction.
Like, herm...Williams?I'm very surprised that the state yielded this point. They just admitted that the regulation exists to reduce the number of permit holders; not to reduce crime, not because of some stupid legislative privilege, and not even "for the children".
It is a regulation expressly for the purpose of restricting a fundamental constitutional right. Period. And they just admitted it in front of a federal judge. I gaurantee you that'll bite them in the ass at some point.
EDIT: Thanks so much Patrick for going and taking notes.
May I suggest if we win that we have a social event of some kind and thank those that have worked so hard to keep us informed? They spent a great deal of their own time above and beyond the rest of us. Heck, we should thank them even if we lose. Good excuse for a meet and greet IMO.
May I suggest if we win that we have a social event of some kind and thank those that have worked so hard to keep us informed? They spent a great deal of their own time above and beyond the rest of us. Heck, we should thank them even if we lose. Good excuse for a meet and greet IMO.
May I suggest if we win that we have a social event of some kind and thank those that have worked so hard to keep us informed? They spent a great deal of their own time above and beyond the rest of us. Heck, we should thank them even if we lose. Good excuse for a meet and greet IMO.
May I suggest if we win that we have a social event of some kind and thank those that have worked so hard to keep us informed? They spent a great deal of their own time above and beyond the rest of us. Heck, we should thank them even if we lose. Good excuse for a meet and greet IMO.
Where were you? I was dead center tan suit. Nice summary, I got the same thing out of it. "Ration a constitutional right" was an awesome phrase. The judge came up with that all by himself.
This is good news, he is not just going through the motions? Breath of fresh air.This judge was prepared. He studied everything, including cited cases.
Outside the Home! YES! good way to lean, that sounds like a slight tip-o-the-poker hand.His words: he leans towards the right extending outside the home...but it might be subject to lesser scrutiny. The question is whether G&S survives that intermediate standard. Also discussed was the idea of "advanced intermediate" (his words), muck like Ezell. He asked both sides if it existed. Both pretty much said yes.
Wow, this is a two-fer. Admission they are merely trying to reduce permit holders using G&S as the tool AND it appears the judge already knew the answer to Texas permit holders crime rate. Another tip of the hand, if you ask me. It tells me the judge already knows that many more permit holders doesn't adversely affect crime statistics.The judge recognized that the point of Maryland regulation was to reduce the number of permit holders in the state. The state reluctantly agreed. The judge asked about statistics of permit holders that commit crimes...in Texas. Maryland tripped over it Gura said "zero point one three percent."
Wow. Did he shake his head? Hit Gansler with his gavel? Again, these questions are loaded. They seem loaded in our favor. No?The judge asked if the state public interest argument let's them "ration a constitutional right." The state said yes.
Could this be an escape hatch? Give Marylanders Shall Issue, but leave the door open for MD to determine "sensitive places"? We knew this was a firm possibility, and we know if it comes to MD being overbearing about it, certainly another Court Case. Kick the can further down the road.It is not all roses for our side. The judge appears sympathetic to arguments that dense populations in parks or downtown will represent a significant risk. But then he noted that would be another case, if Maryland banned those areas.
Ugh. perhaps this was more a way to of saying to MD, look m hands are tied if i am to follow the Constitution. Wishful thinking on my part, perhaps.We can still lose this, easily. The number one question asked was literally "how do I end-run the constitutional question?"