Maryland AWB case Snope v Brown going to SCOTUS. (Formerly Bianchi v Brown & Bianchi v Frosh)

JoseyWales said:
July 2026 is the 250th anniversary, Declaration of Independence, wouldn't it be nice if.....
Click to expand...
Not gonna happen, at this point it’s too late in the term for SCOTUS to hear the Snope or OST cases, if they’re going to grant certiorari (and at this point that’s a big if) it would be for next term at the earliest.
 
Somebody needs to do a funny poll on whether anything is going to happen with this tomorrow. I'm tired and a little sick, so my sense of humor is gone right now. I'm leaning 60/40 that nothing will happen tomorrow either.
 
Coyote33 said:
Somebody needs to do a funny poll on whether anything is going to happen with this tomorrow. I'm tired and a little sick, so my sense of humor is gone right now. I'm leaning 60/40 that nothing will happen tomorrow either.
Click to expand...
ACB will side with the liberals and deny this going any further. She was a mistske
 
1sern said:
This guy doesn't think so:
Maryland AWB case Snope v Brown going to SCOTUS. (Formerly Bianchi v Brown & Bianchi v Frosh)
Click to expand...
I’m usually a fan of Mark Smith’s videos, but even this one had me rolling my eyes. He does some serious mental gymnastics to try and justify ACB’s shortcomings and make it seem like she was still a good SCOTUS pick for Trump.

Like for example, he said we shouldn’t get mad at her for her shadow docket decisions because it’s not indicative of how she’ll ultimately rule in a case on the merits. He then goes on to use the bump stock case as an example of that, where SCOTUS upheld the bump stock ban on interlocutory appeal but ultimately struck down the ban in the end.

Only problem with this example: ACB wasn’t on the court when the bump stock ban was upheld at first, SCOTUS was controlled by the libs at that time. If we use Mark Smith’s own logic against him, let’s look at the ATF ghost gun case. ACB & Chief Justice Roberts sided with the liberals to uphold the ghost gun case on interlocutory appeal, and oral arguments seemed to indicate that both of those 2 justices are poised to side with the liberals and uphold the ghost gun rule on the merits. So, this is an example of where her shadow docket decision actually does reflect her true feelings on the case.

All in all, not the best video he’s ever made and I think ACB is definitely deserving of the criticism she’s receiving from conservatives. Of course no justice is perfect, even our favorite justices like Thomas and Alito have made decisions we don’t all agree with (like Alito siding with the majority on Rahimi comes to mind) but ACB is making too many mistakes at this point.
 
Spartan65 said:
ACB will side with the liberals and deny this going any further. She was a mistske
Click to expand...
Joeldiaz said:
I’m usually a fan of Mark Smith’s videos, but even this one had me rolling my eyes. He does some serious mental gymnastics to try and justify ACB’s shortcomings and make it seem like she was still a good SCOTUS pick for Trump.

Like for example, he said we shouldn’t get mad at her for her shadow docket decisions because it’s not indicative of how she’ll ultimately rule in a case on the merits. He then goes on to use the bump stock case as an example of that, where SCOTUS upheld the bump stock ban on interlocutory appeal but ultimately struck down the ban in the end.

Only problem with this example: ACB wasn’t on the court when the bump stock ban was upheld at first, SCOTUS was controlled by the libs at that time. If we use Mark Smith’s own logic against him, let’s look at the ATF ghost gun case. ACB & Chief Justice Roberts sided with the liberals to uphold the ghost gun case on interlocutory appeal, and oral arguments seemed to indicate that both of those 2 justices are poised to side with the liberals and uphold the ghost gun rule on the merits. So, this is an example of where her shadow docket decision actually does reflect her true feelings on the case.

All in all, not the best video he’s ever made and I think ACB is definitely deserving of the criticism she’s receiving from conservatives. Of course no justice is perfect, even our favorite justices like Thomas and Alito have made decisions we don’t all agree with (like Alito siding with the majority on Rahimi comes to mind) but ACB is making too many mistakes at this point.
Click to expand...

IDK what Barrett's goals are going forward as a SCOTUS justice, but I've been of the opinion that Roberts is grooming her to be his replacement as Chief Justice, so she is making rulings to try to get her in that position. As it stands, Barrett is hated by Democrats for overturning Roe (maybe even by Roberts too as that tainted his precious legacy) and now is hated by the right for siding with the Leftists on the court. The odds of her being nominated by a Republican President for Chief Justice is basically zero now, but a Donk President with a GOP majority senate I could see nominating her as a compromise, so there's strategy for her to appeal to both sides of the spectrum.

How that affects Snope, I can see her siding (again) with the other women because "I FEEL SCARED! EMOTIONS! SAFETY! BAN BAN BAN!"

I'm not yet willing to say that Snope is dead because of Roberts. He's obsessed with his legacy and this case, in legal circles, he looks like such a bitch with how the 4th treated this case and other than the Ghost guns and Rahimi, Roberts has been pretty solid on 2A cases. Still, he's shaky at best with major decisions like this that affect millions of people as was demonstrated with Obamacare and Dobbs.

The reality is nobody in the general public cares about SCOTUS chief justices, nobody today remembers Reinquist and before him I'll bet less than 1% of the population even knows who was the CJ. People generally remember specific associate justices they liked, which is why Ginsberg is going to be talked about for the next 50 years by some and why Scalia is still remembered today and Thomas will likely be too.

IMO, Roberts will side with the majority to strike down AWB and Barrett will again fukk up because that's all she is capable of doing now.

Roberts is probably the happiest guy in the world to see Barrett on the court because the way she's going, she will be remembered as one of the worst justices of all time and make Roberts look decent in comparison.
 
As a reminder, today is a Conference day. Orders List should be released Monday the 10th at 9:30am.

Today at the Court - Friday, Mar 7, 2025​

  • The Supreme Court Building is open to the public from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.
  • The Justices will meet in a private conference to discuss cases and vote on petitions for review.
  • The Court will release an order list at 9:30 a.m. on Monday, March 10.
  • Courtroom Lectures available within the next 30 days.
 
T-Unit said:
I'm not yet willing to say that Snope is dead because of Roberts. He's obsessed with his legacy and this case, in legal circles, he looks like such a bitch with how the 4th treated this case and other than the Ghost guns and Rahimi, Roberts has been pretty solid on 2A cases.
Click to expand...
I’m gonna have to disagree with you there. Roberts is a reliable 6th vote, meaning if you already have 5 votes in the majority to win in a case, you can count on him to side with the conservatives when they’ve clearly got the liberals beat. However, if you’re counting on him to be a swing vote, things aren’t so certain.

One example of this would be in the case of Rogers v. Grewal, circa 2020. This was the Bruen case before Bruen, challenging a similar may-issue permitting regime out of the state of New Jersey I believe. SCOTUS ultimately denied certiorari to that case. However, just a couple years later in 2022, SCOTUS grants certiorari and decides another very similar case (NYSRPA v. Bruen) tackling essentially the same problem as the Grewal case.

You know what was the material differences between these 2 cases? ACB hadn’t yet been on the court during Grewal. Meaning, even though theoretically the conservatives had the 5 votes necessary to win, they must not have felt comfortable enough in Roberts to have faith he would side with them on the merits. It wasn’t until ACB was confirmed when the other conservatives now had a solid 5 majority that they could now not worry about how Roberts would rule on the case. He could side with the liberals and it wouldn’t have mattered, they still had their 5 votes in ACB, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.
 
Joeldiaz said:
I’m gonna have to disagree with you there. Roberts is a reliable 6th vote, meaning if you already have 5 votes in the majority to win in a case, you can count on him to side with the conservatives when they’ve clearly got the liberals beat. However, if you’re counting on him to be a swing vote, things aren’t so certain.

One example of this would be in the case of Rogers v. Grewal, circa 2020. This was the Bruen case before Bruen, challenging a similar may-issue permitting regime out of the state of New Jersey I believe. SCOTUS ultimately denied certiorari to that case. However, just a couple years later in 2022, SCOTUS grants certiorari and decides another very similar case (NYSRPA v. Bruen) tackling essentially the same problem as the Grewal case.

You know what was the material differences between these 2 cases? ACB hadn’t yet been on the court during Grewal. Meaning, even though theoretically the conservatives had the 5 votes necessary to win, they must not have felt comfortable enough in Roberts to have faith he would side with them on the merits. It wasn’t until ACB was confirmed when the other conservatives now had a solid 5 majority that they could now not worry about how Roberts would rule on the case. He could side with the liberals and it wouldn’t have mattered, they still had their 5 votes in ACB, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.
Click to expand...
This - Roberts is a solid 6th vote to water down every conservative opinion possible.
 
Joeldiaz said:
I’m usually a fan of Mark Smith’s videos, but even this one had me rolling my eyes. He does some serious mental gymnastics to try and justify ACB’s shortcomings and make it seem like she was still a good SCOTUS pick for Trump.

Like for example, he said we shouldn’t get mad at her for her shadow docket decisions because it’s not indicative of how she’ll ultimately rule in a case on the merits. He then goes on to use the bump stock case as an example of that, where SCOTUS upheld the bump stock ban on interlocutory appeal but ultimately struck down the ban in the end.

Only problem with this example: ACB wasn’t on the court when the bump stock ban was upheld at first, SCOTUS was controlled by the libs at that time. If we use Mark Smith’s own logic against him, let’s look at the ATF ghost gun case. ACB & Chief Justice Roberts sided with the liberals to uphold the ghost gun case on interlocutory appeal, and oral arguments seemed to indicate that both of those 2 justices are poised to side with the liberals and uphold the ghost gun rule on the merits. So, this is an example of where her shadow docket decision actually does reflect her true feelings on the case.

All in all, not the best video he’s ever made and I think ACB is definitely deserving of the criticism she’s receiving from conservatives. Of course no justice is perfect, even our favorite justices like Thomas and Alito have made decisions we don’t all agree with (like Alito siding with the majority on Rahimi comes to mind) but ACB is making too many mistakes at this point.
Click to expand...
He's a clickbait outrage whore. I started ignoring him a long time ago.
 
Coyote33 said:
I was criticized on here for saying I don't like them and won't listen to them. Seems most of NES loves them.
Click to expand...
I will still stand by what I’ve said before and say that Mark Smith is a great guntuber, most of his videos provide you with great knowledge and insight to make you the smartest person in the room when it comes to 2A. However, not everyone is perfect and even the greatest gun tubers don’t always make the best videos every time. This ACB video is one example of that.
 
Joeldiaz said:
I’m usually a fan of Mark Smith’s videos, but even this one had me rolling my eyes. He does some serious mental gymnastics to try and justify ACB’s shortcomings and make it seem like she was still a good SCOTUS pick for Trump.

Like for example, he said we shouldn’t get mad at her for her shadow docket decisions because it’s not indicative of how she’ll ultimately rule in a case on the merits. He then goes on to use the bump stock case as an example of that, where SCOTUS upheld the bump stock ban on interlocutory appeal but ultimately struck down the ban in the end.

Only problem with this example: ACB wasn’t on the court when the bump stock ban was upheld at first, SCOTUS was controlled by the libs at that time. If we use Mark Smith’s own logic against him, let’s look at the ATF ghost gun case. ACB & Chief Justice Roberts sided with the liberals to uphold the ghost gun case on interlocutory appeal, and oral arguments seemed to indicate that both of those 2 justices are poised to side with the liberals and uphold the ghost gun rule on the merits. So, this is an example of where her shadow docket decision actually does reflect her true feelings on the case.

All in all, not the best video he’s ever made and I think ACB is definitely deserving of the criticism she’s receiving from conservatives. Of course no justice is perfect, even our favorite justices like Thomas and Alito have made decisions we don’t all agree with (like Alito siding with the majority on Rahimi comes to mind) but ACB is making too many mistakes at this point.
Click to expand...
The republicans blew 30 years of political capital on overthrowing Roe V Wade. My guess is they consider this now.
 
Cap'n Mike said:
Interesting take.

Kostas Moros is an attorney for the California Rifle and Pistol Association.

He is a good follow if you are interested in 2A litigation.

He does not do long clickbait videos on YouTube.


View: https://x.com/moroskostas/status/1898398650054607163?s=61
Click to expand...

As I read this, it's starting to tread down a dangerous path with SCOTUS and 2A cases. If SCOTUS were to do what this guy suggested and ruled the way he figures they would, then SCOTUS is basically saying there is no limit to the scope in which states can regulate which rifles/shotguns are available to be sold or even owned. If states want to, they can practically ban all rifles and shotguns because Heller and Macdonald only affected handguns and even at that didn't specify if certain handguns couldn't be banned.

The court does need to take up Snope, we all agree on that. The delay of them granting cert is basically them saying without saying that states can ban whatever they want, they just can't ban everything.

So, on the road to single shots we go thanks to SCOTUS.
 
VetteGirlMA said:
The republicans blew 30 years of political capital on overthrowing Roe V Wade. My guess is they consider this now.
Click to expand...
It was a mistake, but the odds were that no matter who Trump picked in October 2020 they were going to overturn Roe anyway. Barrett just happened to be the choice because McConnell would broom her in thru the Senate and after what happened to Kavanaugh and him being a demonic sex predator meant Trump was going to go with a woman to avoid that.

I don't think Trump or any other Republican will make that same mistake again choosing a woman to go on the court. For as bad as Roberts is, even he had enough sense to know that overturning Roe was a big mistake and actually, looking at his Obamacare ruling, he might have foreseen the same backlash on that and upheld it knowing the election was just 5 months away.

IDK, I'm starting to think we have Roberts all wrong. I still believe he leaked the Dobbs decision, I still think he's obsessed with his legacy, but he also seems to have a sense for the impact the court's rulings will have at the ballot box.
 
pastera said:
This - Roberts is a solid 6th vote to water down every conservative opinion possible.
Click to expand...
And yet when he sided with the majority in Bruen he had Thomas write the opinion.

If he wanted to water that down he'd of given it to ACB or done it himself. Instead he chose the guy who would swing the hardest in the opinion.
 
T-Unit said:
And yet when he sided with the majority in Bruen he had Thomas write the opinion.

If he wanted to water that down he'd of given it to ACB or done it himself. Instead he chose the guy who would swing the hardest in the opinion.
Click to expand...
Roberts specifically likes to try and distribute the workload evenly amongst the justices and try to have everyone write roughly the same amount of opinions per term as best he can. Who he picks to write an opinion is not necessarily always indicative of how strong he wants the opinion to be. Sometimes it’s just a matter of other justices already having been assigned cases to work on that were already heard and argued around that same time.

Also, he did water it down a bit (at least in practical reality) with his and Kavanaugh’s concurrence where they both essentially signed off on shall-issue permitting regimes. You could even also argue that Thomas himself watered down the opinion to make absolutely sure he had the votes necessary to win the case. We all already know that Thomas is the most pro-2A justice on SCOTUS by a wide margin, he might not have wanted to alienate any of the other conservatives and cause them to swing the other way.
 
T-Unit said:
And yet when he sided with the majority in Bruen he had Thomas write the opinion.

If he wanted to water that down he'd of given it to ACB or done it himself. Instead he chose the guy who would swing the hardest in the opinion.
Click to expand...
That's not exactly how it works.
There is a lot of back and forth on how the opinion is worded and written by those joining in the opinion.
That back and forth waters down the opinion.
 
JFR2 said:
If Mark Smith is a clickbait outrage whore, what do you call The Armed Scholar????? :D :D

View attachment 972258View attachment 972259
Click to expand...

I sitll don't get posting from yoru mom's basement in that sing-song voice of some tool showing a how-to on making cinnamon toast on Instagram.


Dadstoys said:
I can't listen to either of them .
It's like ...
Click to expand...


I am really good at FF'ing thru much of the BS and such. BradenBradonBradoonWhatever is much briefer when stuff happens, less professional, but VERY predictable in his timestamps of when he actually gets to the point.

VetteGirlMA said:
The republicans blew 30 years of political capital on overthrowing Roe V Wade. My guess is they consider this now.
Click to expand...

WHAT?? (Political capital???? Against liberals?)


T-Unit said:
It was a mistake, but the odds were that no matter who Trump picked in October 2020 they were going to overturn Roe anyway. Barrett just happened to be the choice because McConnell would broom her in thru the Senate and after what happened to Kavanaugh and him being a demonic sex predator meant Trump was going to go with a woman to avoid that.

I don't think Trump or any other Republican will make that same mistake again choosing a woman to go on the court. For as bad as Roberts is, even he had enough sense to know that overturning Roe was a big mistake and actually, looking at his Obamacare ruling, he might have foreseen the same backlash on that and upheld it knowing the election was just 5 months away.

IDK, I'm starting to think we have Roberts all wrong. I still believe he leaked the Dobbs decision, I still think he's obsessed with his legacy, but he also seems to have a sense for the impact the court's rulings will have at the ballot box.
Click to expand...

Roe was a BAD DECISION. It took FIFTY YEARS to correct it. It was a state right then, it's a state right now, unless Congress wants to take it up, which they chickened out of back in the 70's.

We're not using RvW as the reason Trump lost in 2020, are we? I mean, he could have parted the Red Sea, but his insanity precipitated his loss.
 
Damn. Were all of those denied just on Friday???? I can see why they haven't gotten to Snopes or OST. Lots of crap on their docket for sure. My personal belief is that they are holding til the last minute to see if courts turn the corner on their own or if they have to reiterate.
 

Similar threads

Garland v. VanDerStok
Replies
0
Views
142
lutstribe
L
9th Circuit En Banc Rules As Expected For California In Duncan v. Bonta Mag Ban (Judge VanDyke Dissent Video Included)
Replies
22
Views
714
Coyote33
Coyote33
Former UFC Champion Cain Velasquez Sentenced To Five Years In Prison For Attempted Murder Of Alleged Child Molester
Replies
17
Views
346
Token_Black_Guy
T
SCOTUS denies cert on two 2A cases.
Replies
4
Views
517
Mesatchornug
Mesatchornug
GOAL's Westbrook Case Update/Summary
Replies
4
Views
266
Parker Schreiber
Parker Schreiber
Back
Top Bottom