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

VTski4x4 said:
Orders will be released on Monday.
Click to expand...
Oh.

So, this is not over yet?

I thought they say on Friday what will be released on the following Monday. Isn't that what all the talk here was about? Or did I get that wrong?


So, based on this thread to date, here is my summary to send to the club:
Please watch the news on Monday, March 24, 2025, for a possible bit of information coming out about a case elsewhere in the country which might have an impact on assault weapons in a couple years in Massachusetts, or maybe not. There may be another case similar to this for magazines. Or, maybe you won't hear anything at all.
Click to expand...
I think I'll just skip it completely, and we can be pleasantly surprised if anything ever happens.
 
Coyote33 said:
I think I'll just skip it completely, and we can be pleasantly surprised if anything ever happens.
Click to expand...

We've been telling you that for awhile, lol.

In all sincerity, if anything happens that's of earth-shaking importance? Like, important enough to send out to your club? You're not going to have to ask about it here. It'll be all over the site. Until then, just wait.
 
I thought there was some buildup and anticipation that something was imminent VERY SOON type of thing. Maybe just my optimism. Pessimism is creeping in now.
 
Coyote33 said:
I thought there was some buildup and anticipation that something was imminent VERY SOON type of thing. Maybe just my optimism. Pessimism is creeping in now.
Click to expand...

I'd recommend avoiding both and going with realism.

Take it as it comes. Don't try to predict. It just leads to stress.
 
I'm definitely not expecting anything positive from this Court anytime soon but the one thing that does lend a dose of positivity is the 9th circuit ruling on the Mag ban because realistically this case could be added to Ocean State and that would mean both case, Snopes and Ocean State (combined with CA case) will have both already been to the High Court level and were instructed by the Court that the rulings were incorrect. So if the Supreme Court doesn't take these cases now then they look like the impotent joke that John Robert's is so against his Court looking like. His back is basically against the wall with these cases
 
PappyM3 said:
Ocean state is not a part of this. But that doesn’t mean it couldn’t be included with ocean state later.

As it stands, this ruling only applies to the 9th.
Click to expand...
Is there a separate thread for that somewhere on here?

NEVERMIND, I found it:

Hoover

Thread 'Ocean State Tactical vs Neronha (Rhode Island Fed court, Mag Limit case) Update AWB proposed'

This is the most recent filing. This case has direct impact on people in RI and will have a direct impact on Massachusetts when it gets to the 1st circuit court of appeals.

Remember under NYSRPA vs bruen, SCOTUS said any gun law has to be similar to gun laws in 1791 or 1868. The oldest mag limit was NJ in 1990. Good luck with the history argument there.


View: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1581055594949070848?s=20&t=JLIyUrYkjdI3T9fdTZfVgw


This section is hilarious


View...
 
The two SCOTUS cases being watched:
24-203 - David Snope, et al., Petitioners v. Anthony G. Brown, in His Official Capacity as Attorney General of Maryland, et al. (MD AWB)
24-131 - Ocean State Tactical, LLC, dba Big Bear Hunting and Fishing Supply, et al., Petitioners v. Rhode Island, et al. (RI mag ban)

We will find out, again, this coming Monday at 9:30 am if they are in the Orders List, or if they continue and relist it for the next conference day, or decide to do something else.
Supreme Court Calendar for Monday the 24th:

Today at the Court - Monday, Mar 24, 2025​

  • The Court will release an order list at 9:30 a.m.
  • The Court will convene for a public session in the Courtroom at 10 a.m. The Justices will hear two oral arguments. An audio feed will be live-streamed, and the audio will be available on the Court's website later in the day.
  • Seating for the oral argument session will be provided to the public, members of the Supreme Court Bar, and press. The three-minute line will be temporarily suspended. The Supreme Court Building will be otherwise closed to the public.
  • The Supreme Court Building will reopen to the public following the conclusion of the Court session and close at 3 p.m.
 
MickeyD’s said:
If you ban >10rd magazines then you ban firearms with capacity of 10 or more….

Categorical bans are unconstitutional
Click to expand...
If mags over 10 can be banned, then what's stopping states from banning mags that hold more than 5? It's simply a number generated out of nothing and these courts in the future if a state does a total ban on all detachable mags (think SKS or Mauser Broomahandle as all that's legal for semi autos at that point) the courts will uphold them.

The Left is willing to slowly cut the pie down to nothing with 2A, for now the slice they want is mags over 10 rds and the next step we're seeing from states like Colorado is complete bans on semi autos or at least a process to purchase them so time consuming and costly people won't bother, what I will call a Process Ban where the actual firearm is not banned, but the process to obtain them is such a hurdle that most will not attempt to go thru it or in some cases those of low income won't have the ability to pay for it.

The Left cries deceptively about how expensive and tough it is for some people to get an ID to vote, but those same people they want to put thru the ringer to buy a Hi Point.
 
At this point this isn't about granting or denying cert. If they were going to deny, it would have happened since they've had more than sufficient time to write a dissent of denial.
That leaves either a different question or political subdivision.
Could the different question be US v Brown (5th circuit)? This would give them the ability to side step "assault weapons" and speak directly to machine guns, which will go against us. But in doing so, they could say that anything not a machinegun is protected.
Complete cop out but would split the baby by giving both sides something (congress then only needs to update the NFA definition of machinegun to ban all semiautomatics)
Or they could be kicking the can because of external influences that have dirt on one or more justices.
 
pastera said:
At this point this isn't about granting or denying cert. If they were going to deny, it would have happened since they've had more than sufficient time to write a dissent of denial.
That leaves either a different question or political subdivision.
Could the different question be US v Brown (5th circuit)? This would give them the ability to side step "assault weapons" and speak directly to machine guns, which will go against us. But in doing so, they could say that anything not a machinegun is protected.
Complete cop out but would split the baby by giving both sides something (congress then only needs to update the NFA definition of machinegun to ban all semiautomatics)
Or they could be kicking the can because of external influences that have dirt on one or more justices.
Click to expand...

At the end of the day all this does is further embolden states like Massachusetts, RI, NJ, Cali, and the rest of the anti-gun states as we sit here and watch these more aggressive ASF style weapons and magazine bans proliferate into formerly traditional gun states like Maine, Montana, Colorado and the like.
 
pastera said:
At this point this isn't about granting or denying cert. If they were going to deny, it would have happened since they've had more than sufficient time to write a dissent of denial.
That leaves either a different question or political subdivision.
Could the different question be US v Brown (5th circuit)? This would give them the ability to side step "assault weapons" and speak directly to machine guns, which will go against us. But in doing so, they could say that anything not a machinegun is protected.
Complete cop out but would split the baby by giving both sides something (congress then only needs to update the NFA definition of machinegun to ban all semiautomatics)
Or they could be kicking the can because of external influences that have dirt on one or more justices.
Click to expand...
The problem is that semi automatics are in common use, so Congress changing language in the NFA to include it would be struck down. As to the court ruling anything not an MG is protected, that wouldn't come up in the Brown case because the court focuses on the question, which in this case is MG related, so the ruling is going to be either, yes it can be regulated/banned or not and if it's not then MG's are good to go and the court is never going to do that.

So, the court is just kicking the issue. They are waiting for a snoozer of a 2A case that has little impact on anything to virtue signal. At this rate, I don't think the court is ever going to grant cert to Snope or OST, not until Roberts or Barrett are off the bench which won't be for another 10-15 years.
 
One would think that they would have denied both cases by now if they were not going to take it up, or if one or more justices were going to write a scathing statement on the denial of cert. So it begs the question of what is happening behind the scenes? Are they waiting for other cases to be petitioned to SCOTUS? Is there internal fight going on over these cases? Their continual kicking the can down the road since last November for both cases makes the court look weak and has emboldened various states to ramp up their push for AWB, or straight up semi-auto bans, along with other gun control.

Assuming they relist for the next conference day, Friday March 28th, with it's orders list scheduled for the following Monday, March 31st at 9:30 a.m.

Today at the Court - Friday, Mar 28, 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 31.
  • Courtroom Lectures available within the next 30 days.
 
If granted today or in June. It doesn’t change the time line one bit, Earlier rather than later Cert. May or may not slow down a state like RI attempting to push through a ban on everything
 
sbhaven said:
One would think that they would have denied both cases by now if they were not going to take it up, or if one or more justices were going to write a scathing statement on the denial of cert. So it begs the question of what is happening behind the scenes? Are they waiting for other cases to be petitioned to SCOTUS?
Click to expand...

My guess is that they were waiting on Duncan v. Bonta and the inevitable petition for cert from that case. Had the 9th circuit struck down the ban, there would have been a conflict in the circuits, which would have forced the Supreme Court's hand. I now predict that a decision on cert will come on April 7th, and I honestly have no clue what they'll decide.
 
Parker Schreiber said:
My guess is that they were waiting on Duncan v. Bonta and the inevitable petition for cert from that case.
Click to expand...
That's what some are speculating. Waiting for Duncan v. Bonta and maybe Miller v. Bonta (if that is still going on). In other words waiting for the rest of the previous Bruen GVR'd cases to come back to SCOTUS. Meanwhile, as the justices dawdle and kick that can, more AWB/mag bans are likely to be enacted further expanding the already 1/3 of the nation covered by such bans.
 
sbhaven said:
That's what some are speculating. Waiting for Duncan v. Bonta and maybe Miller v. Bonta (if that is still going on). In other words waiting for the rest of the previous Bruen GVR'd cases to come back to SCOTUS. Meanwhile, as the justices dawdle and kick that can, more AWB/mag bans are likely to be enacted further expanding the already 1/3 of the nation covered by such bans.
Click to expand...

Miller v Bonta was tabled in the 9th waiting for a decision on Duncan. SCOTUS won't see that case for some time with the 9th circuit games. Unless they grab the case from the 9th clowns. Unlikely.........
 
HorizontalHunter said:
At the end of the day all this does is further embolden states like Massachusetts, RI, NJ, Cali, and the rest of the anti-gun states as we sit here and watch these more aggressive ASF style weapons and magazine bans proliferate into formerly traditional gun states like Maine, Montana, Colorado and the like.
Click to expand...

Maybe. And maybe states like CA and RI and MA and NJ will just ignore teh next order as well. I'll CONTINUE to point out the busing issue in Boston, circa 20 years after BvBoA. They were FORCED to comply.

What will change is another specific order and then everyone just starts ignoring the legislature and AG on these issues (magazines, gun bans, etc.,)
 


Write your reply...

Similar threads

Garland v. VanDerStok
Replies
0
Views
144
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
731
Coyote33
Coyote33
Former UFC Champion Cain Velasquez Sentenced To Five Years In Prison For Attempted Murder Of Alleged Child Molester
Replies
17
Views
351
Token_Black_Guy
T
SCOTUS denies cert on two 2A cases.
Replies
12
Views
999
Coyote33
Coyote33
GOAL's Westbrook Case Update/Summary
Replies
4
Views
267
Parker Schreiber
Parker Schreiber
Back
Top Bottom