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

[randyho]

I just realized if the assault weapon law goes away in maryland so does the minimum length of SBR's. As the copy cat weapon part of the law is what bans sbr's under 29 inches.

Good observation. Thank you.

 

[Allen65]

My SBR just grew a little…temporarily, of course.

Well, the temperature has warmed up a bit during the day.

 

[E.Shell]

'Capice' means 'do you understand?' in Italian. It's pronounces 'ka-peesh', JFTR.

A 1968 Capice was my first car. More luxurious than the Impala, but sported a 327 4-barrel.

 

[whistlersmother]

I just realized if the assault weapon law goes away in maryland so does the minimum length of SBR's. As the copy cat weapon part of the law is what bans sbr's under 29 inches.

Hello, 7th son of Tavor.

 

[mauser58]

A 1968 Capice was my first car. More luxurious than the Impala, but sported a 327 4-barrel.

Was also my first car.

 

[Rabu Rabu]

I just realized if the assault weapon law goes away in maryland so does the minimum length of SBR's. As the copy cat weapon part of the law is what bans sbr's under 29 inches.

Admittedly this is what I'm looking most forward to. There's only like 3 guns I missed out on in 2013.

 

[SPQM]

The judges were listed on the docket for the case yesterday, so I looked them up to see who was who, and what our chances were going to be. Apparently there was a last minute change and Thacker was added in place of someone else, but I'm not sure who - it could have been 3-0 instead of 2-1, although there is a slim chance that because Bruen is written so clearly, that Thacker won't have a choice but to flip and decide in favor of Bianchi.

I think this is all deliberate politics by 4CA.

Most of the post-Bruen decisions and laws that violate Bruen are by one of two groups of people:

A.) Politicians
or
B.) Low Ranking Judges.

By Contrast, the 4th Circuit Court is pretty much one step below Clarence Thomas; and as such...they know what Big Daddy Clarence wrote; and they know that if they step out of line, Clarence can make life very unpleasant for them.

The guys on Fourth Circuit like being Federal Judges, but at the same time they also like the DC area social cocktail circuit; so they came up with a deal amongst themselves.

They're gonna do a 2-1 decision (instead of 3-0) on Bruen; and when Frosh/MD appeals it for an en banc ruling to all of 4CA, they're gonna turn down the en banc and deny it.

Because if they take Bianchi en banc (like before) then it's not just three justices who are in the firing line, but EVERYONE on 4CA.

And they can't ignore Bruen or Clarence's instructions (which were quite explict); because as I said before, they're just one rung below Clarence; so....like I said, Frosh is going to find en banc DENIED.

Frosh and others who have been used to rare pro-gun wins in circuits being crushed via en banc are about to find out that the rules of the game have changed -- pre Bruen, crushing it en banc was cheap and painless and got a lot of social credit from the cocktail crowd for Circuit Judges.

Now...post-Bruen, the cocktail crowd is going to be disappointed now that circuit judges have some real skin in the game...

I would not be surprised to see the three judges on this case "coast" for a couple years in 4CA, getting the "easy", non controversial cases, in exchange for biting the bullet and doing the deed on this.

 

[Mark75H]

I think this is all deliberate politics by 4CA.

Most of the post-Bruen decisions and laws that violate Bruen are by one of two groups of people:

A.) Politicians
or
B.) Low Ranking Judges.

By Contrast, the 4th Circuit Court is pretty much one step below Clarence Thomas; and as such...they know what Big Daddy Clarence wrote; and they know that if they step out of line, Clarence can make life very unpleasant for them.

The guys on Fourth Circuit like being Federal Judges, but at the same time they also like the DC area social cocktail circuit; so they came up with a deal amongst themselves.

They're gonna do a 2-1 decision (instead of 3-0) on Bruen; and when Frosh/MD appeals it for an en banc ruling to all of 4CA, they're gonna turn down the en banc and deny it.

Because if they take Bianchi en banc (like before) then it's not just three justices who are in the firing line, but EVERYONE on 4CA.

And they can't ignore Bruen or Clarence's instructions (which were quite explict); because as I said before, they're just one rung below Clarence; so....like I said, Frosh is going to find en banc DENIED.

Frosh and others who have been used to rare pro-gun wins in circuits being crushed via en banc are about to find out that the rules of the game have changed -- pre Bruen, crushing it en banc was cheap and painless and got a lot of social credit from the cocktail crowd for Circuit Judges.

Now...post-Bruen, the cocktail crowd is going to be disappointed now that circuit judges have some real skin in the game...

I would not be surprised to see the three judges on this case "coast" for a couple years in 4CA, getting the "easy", non controversial cases, in exchange for biting the bullet and doing the deed on this.

I be watching this to see if it comes true.

 

[Allen65]

I think this is all deliberate politics by 4CA.

Most of the post-Bruen decisions and laws that violate Bruen are by one of two groups of people:

A.) Politicians
or
B.) Low Ranking Judges.

By Contrast, the 4th Circuit Court is pretty much one step below Clarence Thomas; and as such...they know what Big Daddy Clarence wrote; and they know that if they step out of line, Clarence can make life very unpleasant for them.

The guys on Fourth Circuit like being Federal Judges, but at the same time they also like the DC area social cocktail circuit; so they came up with a deal amongst themselves.

They're gonna do a 2-1 decision (instead of 3-0) on Bruen; and when Frosh/MD appeals it for an en banc ruling to all of 4CA, they're gonna turn down the en banc and deny it.

Because if they take Bianchi en banc (like before) then it's not just three justices who are in the firing line, but EVERYONE on 4CA.

And they can't ignore Bruen or Clarence's instructions (which were quite explict); because as I said before, they're just one rung below Clarence; so....like I said, Frosh is going to find en banc DENIED.

Frosh and others who have been used to rare pro-gun wins in circuits being crushed via en banc are about to find out that the rules of the game have changed -- pre Bruen, crushing it en banc was cheap and painless and got a lot of social credit from the cocktail crowd for Circuit Judges.

Now...post-Bruen, the cocktail crowd is going to be disappointed now that circuit judges have some real skin in the game...

I would not be surprised to see the three judges on this case "coast" for a couple years in 4CA, getting the "easy", non controversial cases, in exchange for biting the bullet and doing the deed on this.

Couldn't they just wash their hands of it (for a while, anyway) by remanding it back down to District for additional discovery? That was what the State was pushing for on the "in common use" issue, endless discovery on exactly what firearms are commonly used for self defense. Which shouldn't even be relevant for a THT evaluation, let alone the fact that Heller said in common use for any lawful purpose, not just self defense.

 

[Bob A]

I think this is all deliberate politics by 4CA.

Most of the post-Bruen decisions and laws that violate Bruen are by one of two groups of people:

A.) Politicians
or
B.) Low Ranking Judges.

By Contrast, the 4th Circuit Court is pretty much one step below Clarence Thomas; and as such...they know what Big Daddy Clarence wrote; and they know that if they step out of line, Clarence can make life very unpleasant for them.

The guys on Fourth Circuit like being Federal Judges, but at the same time they also like the DC area social cocktail circuit; so they came up with a deal amongst themselves.

They're gonna do a 2-1 decision (instead of 3-0) on Bruen; and when Frosh/MD appeals it for an en banc ruling to all of 4CA, they're gonna turn down the en banc and deny it.

Because if they take Bianchi en banc (like before) then it's not just three justices who are in the firing line, but EVERYONE on 4CA.

And they can't ignore Bruen or Clarence's instructions (which were quite explict); because as I said before, they're just one rung below Clarence; so....like I said, Frosh is going to find en banc DENIED.

Frosh and others who have been used to rare pro-gun wins in circuits being crushed via en banc are about to find out that the rules of the game have changed -- pre Bruen, crushing it en banc was cheap and painless and got a lot of social credit from the cocktail crowd for Circuit Judges.

Now...post-Bruen, the cocktail crowd is going to be disappointed now that circuit judges have some real skin in the game...

I would not be surprised to see the three judges on this case "coast" for a couple years in 4CA, getting the "easy", non controversial cases, in exchange for biting the bullet and doing the deed on this.

This sounds quite hopeful to me.

I'm curious how Thomas can make things uncomfortable for a Circuit Court judge?

 

[John from MD]

Was also my first car.

I feel old. My first car was a 57 Ford Fairlane.

 

[eruby]

Was also my first car.

My grandfather always called it "the Cadillac of the Chevrolet line"

I feel old. My first car was a 57 Ford Fairlane.

The Rock and Roll detective

 

[babalou]

My grandfather always called it "the Cadillac of the Chevrolet line"



The Rock and Roll detective

Hahahaha.

My grandfather always called it "the Cadillac of the Chevrolet line"



The Rock and Roll detective

What are your names. Neil and Bob…………

 

[SPQM]

This sounds quite hopeful to me.

I'm curious how Thomas can make things uncomfortable for a Circuit Court judge?

One of SCOTUS' jobs is to regulate the lower courts -- they don't get deep into the weeds, being very hands off.

But they can order lower courts around if necessary. "You did this wrong. Here's what you did wrong. Rule correctly this time."

We saw a glimpse of this with Bruen nuking a lot of 2A jurisprudence and adopting THT; followed by them doing Grant, Vacate and Remand (GVRs) to a lot of cases; including Bianchi.

Right now, we're in the "passive aggressive" phase by SCOTUS; if Bruen continues to be spindled by lower courts, expect a few Court Orders in the next term.

If that doesn't do it, expect Thomas to take on an AWB case the soonest he can. "I gave you all a chance. Now I'm going to mess you up and for good..."

 

[jcutonilli]

I think this is all deliberate politics by 4CA.

Most of the post-Bruen decisions and laws that violate Bruen are by one of two groups of people:

A.) Politicians
or
B.) Low Ranking Judges.

By Contrast, the 4th Circuit Court is pretty much one step below Clarence Thomas; and as such...they know what Big Daddy Clarence wrote; and they know that if they step out of line, Clarence can make life very unpleasant for them.

The guys on Fourth Circuit like being Federal Judges, but at the same time they also like the DC area social cocktail circuit; so they came up with a deal amongst themselves.

They're gonna do a 2-1 decision (instead of 3-0) on Bruen; and when Frosh/MD appeals it for an en banc ruling to all of 4CA, they're gonna turn down the en banc and deny it.

Because if they take Bianchi en banc (like before) then it's not just three justices who are in the firing line, but EVERYONE on 4CA.

And they can't ignore Bruen or Clarence's instructions (which were quite explict); because as I said before, they're just one rung below Clarence; so....like I said, Frosh is going to find en banc DENIED.

Frosh and others who have been used to rare pro-gun wins in circuits being crushed via en banc are about to find out that the rules of the game have changed -- pre Bruen, crushing it en banc was cheap and painless and got a lot of social credit from the cocktail crowd for Circuit Judges.

Now...post-Bruen, the cocktail crowd is going to be disappointed now that circuit judges have some real skin in the game...

I would not be surprised to see the three judges on this case "coast" for a couple years in 4CA, getting the "easy", non controversial cases, in exchange for biting the bullet and doing the deed on this.

The change in judges is not a political decision. It was likely due to the fact that Traxler is a senior judge (semiretired). He was replaced by Niemeyer. While Traxler was part of the original Kolbe panel and wrote the en banc dissent in that case, Niemeyer joined that dissent. I do not see the outcome changing based on Niemeyer rather than Traxler.

The en banc court is not going to be as accommodating as you suggest. It is still has a majority of judges willing to limit the interpretation of the 2A. We will need to wait for the opinion, but I could see the en banc court kicking any favorable ruling back down to the district court for fact finding.

The typical 4CA case takes about 6 months to decide, which would put the time frame around early March for a opinion based on the typical case.

 

[Allen65]

The en banc court is not going to be as accommodating as you suggest. It is still has a majority of judges willing to limit the interpretation of the 2A. We will need to wait for the opinion, but I could see the en banc court kicking any favorable ruling back down to the district court for fact finding.

The typical 4CA case takes about 6 months to decide, which would put the time frame around early March for a opinion based on the typical case.

Running out the clock on the four Bruen-remanded cases is the strategy that best serves the Antis' purposes post-Bruen. En banc, remand to District, and let the case sit in discovery and pre-hearing maneuvers indefinitely as the populists who've hijacked the GOP continue to hand the Dems enough general election wins to remake SCOTUS, and the rest of the judiciary, to permanently entrench Progressive and statist philosophies. The Antis know how critical it is that Bianchi not end up back in front of the current SCOTUS.

Is there some way a challenge could be mounted and fast-tracked in a more 2A-friendly Appellate Circuit to bring the issue back before SCOTUS in maybe the next 5 years and get AWB issues out of the hands of passive-aggressive Anti jurists?

 

[SPQM]

The change in judges is not a political decision. It was likely due to the fact that Traxler is a senior judge (semiretired). He was replaced by Niemeyer. While Traxler was part of the original Kolbe panel and wrote the en banc dissent in that case, Niemeyer joined that dissent. I do not see the outcome changing based on Niemeyer rather than Traxler.

Point.

The en banc court is not going to be as accommodating as you suggest. It is still has a majority of judges willing to limit the interpretation of the 2A. We will need to wait for the opinion, but I could see the en banc court kicking any favorable ruling back down to the district court for fact finding.

It's possible that could happen -- but you have to keep in mind that Bianchi v Frosh was scheduled on SCOTUS conferences for a very very long time -- it kept getting relisted and relisted for conference, before finally being GVR'ed post-Bruen -- surely someone on 4CA noticed that?

EDIT: 10:25 PM 12/21: Someone on AR15 pointed out something regards the Elon/Twitter deal that helped explain my POV, so I'm reposting a cut down version:

Q: "How did the Powers That Be (TPTB) lose control of Twitter to Elon? They could have brought in loads of cash from outside investors to outbid Elon"

A: "Plainly and simply, regulatory pressure forced the sale. Public companies have fiduciary responsibilities to shareholders. Elon made an outstanding offer that the shareholders wanted and the board could not refuse. If the board did not accept it, they would likely be sued. The Twitter board was between a rock and a hard place that NO ONE anticipated would happen."

This is the kind of dynamic that I'm hoping will play out with Bianchi and other 2A cases once they get high enough (Circuit level).

At those levels, if they outright ignore clear and direct SCOTUS orders to disregard Two Step and adopt Text, History and Tradition in the format showed by Heller and Bruen....you might be setting precedent of their own.

While no federal judge has ever been disciplined in either manner for failure to apply precedent...there's always a first time...

 

[CruncherBlock]

What is the next step? I was expecting a decision by now.

 

[fabsroman]

What is the next step? I was expecting a decision by now.

What you expect and what you get are two different things.

3% chance we will have an opinion in 2 weeks.

 

[Garet Jax]

Weeks

Yup 52-104