Montgomery County Bill 21-22

[mac1_131]

If State law preempts county law, does a PI on a State level affect a similar County law?

Yes, how can this stand FOR EVEN A MINUTE LONGER when the state version is, at least for now, not allowed to go in to effect.

 

[Biggfoot44]

Hard to understand how they can stop SB1 when this 100 yard MoCo rule makes that look like a small foul... really shows how much this judge is trying to legislate from the bench IMHO.

Different cases , different Judges .

And the Injunction didn't freeze enforcement of the entirety of SB-1 , just two specific parts , the sinage , and eateries that serve alcohol .

MSI has an upcoming hearing in the MoCo case re 100 yard buffer zone , and Place of Worship . Oct 14 IIRC .

 

[FrankZ]

Yes, how can this stand FOR EVEN A MINUTE LONGER when the state version is, at least for now, not allowed to go in to effect.

Because state law allows counties to define sensitive places outside of preemption, up to the limit that MoCo used even.

 

[Biggfoot44]

If State law preempts county law, does a PI on a State level affect a similar County law?

20-21 doesn't have a counterpart of " Guns Welcome Here " signage . I'll have to re check the fine print of both for the exact language regarding establishments selling alcohol . MoCo will automatically claim theirs is different .

Can it be piggybacked into the upcoming Hearing for the 2 specific Injunctions , or would it require a fresh procedure from scratch ? Dunno , but a good question .

 

[GTOGUNNER]

Different cases , different Judges .

And the Injunction didn't freeze enforcement of the entirety of SB-1 , just two specific parts , the sinage , and eateries that serve alcohol .

MSI has an upcoming hearing in the MoCo case re 100 yard buffer zone , and Place of Worship . Oct 14 IIRC .

The dicta of the state case will be persuasive for sure. Both cases are on shakey ground and the government losers know it. Time to hit them with open carry. They can’t win getting rid if that.

 

[swinokur]

One of Mo Co arguments is that preemption does not apply

 

[teratos]

One of Mo Co arguments is that preemption does not apply

Nor does the Constitution!

 

[Fractionsofzero]

I acknowledge that I'm misreading something.
But I cannot put my finger on what I am missing.

As I read the statute sec57.11. It reads that within 100 yards of a public etc --> a person must not etc --> this section does not --> apply to the possession of a handgun by a person who has received a permit to carry the handgun under state law --> Or -> apply to seperate ammunition or an unloaded gun.

???

So you must not do this /but/ this does not apply to people with permits or unloaded guns.
Right?
How else should this be read? It's late and I have been working all weekend but what am I missing here?

 

[mac1_131]

That looks like the law that was in place before. Read the bill that was passed for updates.

 

[esqappellate]

That looks like the law that was in place before. Read the bill that was passed for updates.

Right. Bill 21-22e repealed the exception for permit holders

 

[eljefe]

https://x.com/gunpolicy/status/1709989850923860429?s=20

No injunction pending appeal and they disallowed the map?!? I'm kind of new to this, but it seems like they should at least give some kind of explanation.

 

[Occam]

https://x.com/gunpolicy/status/1709989850923860429?s=20

No injunction pending appeal and they disallowed the map?!? I'm kind of new to this, but it seems like they should at least give some kind of explanation.

Their explanation: "We hate you, your politics and everything you stand for. That is particularly true if you're the sort of person who would own - let alone carry - a gun. Our hatred is virtuous, and you are not. Quit complaining."

 

[csanc123]

What the fuq? Im paraphrasing but it was explained to the judge that new evidence/supporting artifacts like the map could be submitted according to the existing rules of law....the judge said "nope". What the fuq!!!!

 

[csanc123]

Their explanation: "We hate you, your politics and everything you stand for. That is particularly true if you're the sort of person who would own - let alone carry - a gun. Our hatred is virtuous, and you are not. Quit complaining."

This is beyond treacherous. The mofo judge disallowed/threw out the map! I guess it was too factual!

 

[csanc123]

https://x.com/gunpolicy/status/1709989850923860429?s=20

No injunction pending appeal and they disallowed the map?!? I'm kind of new to this, but it seems like they should at least give some kind of explanation.

So infuriating. What a POS judge.

 

[csanc123]

So infuriating. What a POS judge.

And...

Why did Judge Rushing concur??? (Installed by Trump!)....the others are Obama appointments.

 

[RFBfromDE]

And...

Why did Judge Rushing concur??? (Installed by Trump!)....the others are Obama appointments.

No one gets installed with out approval from the Senators representing the State. Remind us who the Senators are and what party they represent.

 

[coinboy]

https://x.com/gunpolicy/status/1709989850923860429?s=20

No injunction pending appeal and they disallowed the map?!? I'm kind of new to this, but it seems like they should at least give some kind of explanation.

Wow.

That's some BS.

I think we know where we stand with the 4th circuit.

 

[csanc123]

No one gets installed with out approval from the Senators representing the State. Remind us who the Senators are and what party they represent.

"Allison Rushing, a Williams and Connolly partner nominated to the federal bench by President Trump in August, was confirmed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit by a vote that split along party lines. All 53 Republicans voted for her, while the rest of the Senate voted against her, with the exception of three senators who were absent — Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.)."

 

[RFBfromDE]

"Allison Rushing, a Williams and Connolly partner nominated to the federal bench by President Trump in August, was confirmed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit by a vote that split along party lines. All 53 Republicans voted for her, while the rest of the Senate voted against her, with the exception of three senators who were absent — Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.)."

Van Hollen and Cardin are the two Democrat Senators from MD.

The nominee must have sufficient Liberal Bone Fides to be approved by them to be appointed no matter the party of the President attempting to appoint them.