When granted it will be for next term, in the courts view what is the rush…. As long as they make a decision before the end of the term. Everyone will still have plenty of time to submit briefs and prepare their cases
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/Pioneer Valley Arms April Giveaway ***Smith & Wesson SD9VE 9MM***
Maryland AWB case Snope v Brown going to SCOTUS. (Formerly Bianchi v Brown & Bianchi v Frosh)
- Thread starter Cap'n Mike
- Start date
Worst effing 2A channel ever. 100% clickbait, 0 shame.If Mark Smith is a clickbait outrage whore, what do you call The Armed Scholar?????
View attachment 972258View attachment 972259
Or they are just waiting for the next school shooting so they use that as an excuse to avoid this forever
pastera
NES Member
No 4 boxes is a technical channel for judicial geeks. Nit click bait but below the water line for most people.
Armed scholar - click bait BS
Parker Schreiber
NES Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2020
- Messages
- 2,360
- Likes
- 3,380
At least one of the denials was of interest to this forum. In USA v. Narey Perez-Quibus, the petitioner attempted to challenge the constitutionality of 18 U.S. Code § 922 post-Bruen and was summarily bounced by 11th circuit and the Supreme Court.
aphextwin11
NES Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2022
- Messages
- 233
- Likes
- 634
Interesting that the 11th cited heller, Bruen, and rahimi as declaring 922 presumptively lawful on its face. Im assuming by denying cert, scotus agrees? I didn't read the entire opinion so I'm unfamiliar with the defendants exact circumstances, but wondering if they challenged 'as applied' they would've had a chance
CatSnoutSoup
NES Member
Couldn't they do that regardless of when they granted cert, just by setting the date for oral arguments that meets that end?
pastera
NES Member
As soon as they grant Cert the left will go apoplecticCouldn't they do that regardless of when they granted cert, just by setting the date for oral arguments that meets that end?
- Joined
- May 1, 2009
- Messages
- 2,431
- Likes
- 3,899
Right in time for the 250th anniversary of the DOI.
Reading through the case details (for example here), not particularly surprised SCOTUS denied cert for that case.
Parker Schreiber
NES Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2020
- Messages
- 2,360
- Likes
- 3,380
The link you give is to an evidentiary hearing. Here's the 11th Circuit decision:
Unfortunately, I was unable to determine what the prior felony conviction was for, but it didn't seem to matter to the 11th.
Yes and the defendant's history (claimed sexual assault, battery, threatening with gun/knife, and other crimes alleged by the girlfriend and other things) outlined in that evidentiary hearing make for a rather unsympathetic (possibly violent) defendant and might give cause for a easy rejecting of the cert application that was based on trying to challenge 922. And yes, strangely not seeing what the prior felony conviction was.
pastera
NES Member
If prior felony was considered violent then Rahimi covers it.
VetteGirlMA
NES Member
Every election results in a gain in political capital for one side or the other. It's a fixed universe of points. So right now it's the GOP's turn. They can focus in on making the tough choices on government spending or blowing it all on culture war bullsh*t that will amount to nothing except to embolden the other side, which is what appears to be happening.
Parker Schreiber
NES Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2020
- Messages
- 2,360
- Likes
- 3,380
That appears to be the docket for the Supreme Court action sending it back after Rahimi. The dates shown are in 2024. The 2nd Circuit issued a new opinion which struck down the social media and private place restrictions but kept in place the rest. That's now up for cert for a second round, but it hasn't been scheduled for conference yet.I just looked it up. Looks like something is happening March 25.
Antonyuk v. James - SCOTUSblog
Independent News and Analysis on the U.S. Supreme Courtwww.scotusblog.com
Duh. I totally missed the year. Sorry. I went and deleted it out.
Last edited:
VTski4x4
NES Member
So I notice it hasn't be distributed for conference for tomorrow. Is there no SCOTUS tomorrow? What's going on?
Nightshift
NES Member
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2020
- Messages
- 787
- Likes
- 1,987
3/21 next conference date.
Nightshift
NES Member
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2020
- Messages
- 787
- Likes
- 1,987
Distributed for Conference of 3/21/25
Again…….
Again…….
Nightshift
NES Member
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2020
- Messages
- 787
- Likes
- 1,987
A definite maybe is better than a definite NO!
Cap'n Mike
NES Member
It’s been re-listed so many times now, the possibility of a cert denial seems remote.
Last edited:
Never once have I thought they would be denied…..admittedly it is taking longer than I expected. I’m sure there is good reasons we are no privy to at this time
Nightshift
NES Member
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2020
- Messages
- 787
- Likes
- 1,987
I don't completely share your certainty. By nature, I am a pessimist. But I too hope/believe there must be a reason, and a justifiably good one!
From their standpoint, there's no real rush. And there are several relevant cases in the pipeline; having waited this long, they might be wondering what's going to happen with some of those.
It's a pain in the ass for us, though I don't really expect the justices to care much about that.
Nightshift
NES Member
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2020
- Messages
- 787
- Likes
- 1,987
So true unfortunately.
Dennis in MA
NES Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2007
- Messages
- 41,431
- Likes
- 37,022
Pessimists don't think the world is ending, they just don't like being disappointed. Same camp, different day as you. But I'm hopeful that these 2 cases throw a few more nails in the coffin of 2A restrictions. I'm ready to buy a nice PCC or something for home defense with all srots of extra-scary features.
Similar threads
