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

M1911 said:
Reagan wasn’t president in 1994. He was president from 1981 - 1989. The assault weapons ban of 1994 was passed during the Clinton presidency.
Click to expand...
Right. Reagan passed the Firearms Owners Protection Act. Which among other things, banned civilian ownership of all machine guns manufactured after the effective date of the law.
 
dcmdon said:
Right. Reagan passed the Firearms Owners Protection Act. Which among other things, banned civilian ownership of all machine guns manufactured after the effective date of the law.
Click to expand...
And in exchange we got the freedom to travel through states with prohibitive laws. So we shouldn’t paint that law as all bad.

I’m not saying Reagan was awesome on guns. I am saying that we shouldn’t blame the AWB on him.
 
dcmdon said:
Right. Reagan passed the Firearms Owners Protection Act. Which among other things, banned civilian ownership of all machine guns manufactured after the effective date of the law.
Click to expand...
The fix was in. A voice vote was taken, the results were not obvious, and the chair (I think house speaker) banged the gavel saying something like "The ayes have it".
 
M1911 said:
And in exchange we got the freedom to travel through states with prohibitive laws. So we shouldn’t paint that law as all bad.

I’m not saying Reagan was awesome on guns. I am saying that we shouldn’t blame the AWB on him.
Click to expand...
I would rather have the ability to have machine guns.
 
Read the petition yesterday - didn't have time to take notes.
The petition is essentially a full brief and a very well written one at that.
While it is densely packed with a ton of the history of this case it is a relatively easy read since it is written in a very plain way - I think there are two places where Latin legal terms are used and those a very easy to understand with a quick Google search of the terms.

The petition does address the 4th's open rebellion but does it without looking like the little a**h*** we all wanted to punch in school screaming "teacher look at Johnny he's chewing gum!".

I don't see SCOTUS not taking this. However, I also don't see an early decision on this one either and would predict even if it is heard early the opinion won't be seen until well after the election.

Given the arguments in the petition, SCOTUS will have two choices
  1. Strike down all bans on semiautomatic arms
  2. Strike down stare decisis and over rule Heller, Caetano and Bruen
 
fishgutzy said:
Anti-Constitution judges always add words that are not there. In Heller it refers to "in common use" not "in common use for self defense."
Prior decisions stated that the 2A does cover bearable arms that are useful to the military. This language was in a decision that upheld the ban on sawed off shotguns.
The left can not have it both ways. They cannot ban both weapon not useful to the military and those useful to the military.
Mexico bans all firearms for civilians that are deemed exclusively for use by the military. The cartels have anything they want. Mere mortal citizens are limited to bolt action, breach loader rifles and shotguns, and revolver .38 and smaller. The cartels now control Mexico.
Click to expand...
Most judges are not genius jurists. They are politically appointed or elected toadies who do what their politicians dictate.
 
M1911 said:
And in exchange we got the freedom to travel through states with prohibitive laws. So we shouldn’t paint that law as all bad.
Click to expand...
"Barely" . FOPA often failed where it counted the most, because it still failed to protect a whole bunch of people transiting port authority airports that simply didn't know any better that they shouldn't take their gun from those airports and return without a permission slip. The scenario where FOPA was most useful/needed, it fails at horribly.
 
Congress has had almost 40 years to fix an obvious flaw in the 1986 law, yet has done nothing.

drgrant said:
"Barely" . FOPA often failed where it counted the most, because it still failed to protect a whole bunch of people transiting port authority airports that simply didn't know any better that they shouldn't take their gun from those airports and return without a permission slip. The scenario where FOPA was most useful/needed, it fails at horribly.
Click to expand...
 
Just posted by Mark Smith, Four Boxes Dinner. Maryland's request for 30 days essentially denied. He seems to think the SCOTUS will conference on or around December 13th, 2024 on whether or not to hear the Maryland Snope case. He indicates we could find sometime around January 10, 2025 if they grant cert to the case. If cert granted it, likely means an opinion later in 2025. He sees it as a positive sign that Justice Roberts, who oversees the 4th Circuit, didn't grant Maryland's request for a 30 day delay.

"SCOTUS denied MD's request to extend their time to file an opposition to the 2A supporters' petition for cert by another 30 days. Mark Smith Four Boxes Diner discusses the huge importance of this decision issued late on Friday."


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZjJyflvz_w
 
Last edited:
Tuesday in November will dictate how this will go down. In a all out attack on the court for the democrats if they win in November. The court will be packed by some emergency leagle shuffle or emergency executive order. If not only to stiffel casses like this but to do another Row vs. Wade turnover dicession.
 
JDL said:
Tuesday in November will dictate how this will go down. In a all out attack on the court for the democrats if they win in November. The court will be packed by some emergency leagle shuffle or emergency executive order. If not only to stiffel casses like this but to do another Row vs. Wade turnover dicession.
Click to expand...
The next president will very likely appoint anywhere from one to three replacements for conservatives on the court - They don't need to pack the court by increasing the number of justices.

If Trump wins then Alito and Thomas need to quickly plan their exits.
And if Roberts actually cares about the court he will retire shortly after.
 
pastera said:
The next president will very likely appoint anywhere from one to three replacements for conservatives on the court - They don't need to pack the court by increasing the number of justices.

If Trump wins then Alito and Thomas need to quickly plan their exits.
And if Roberts actually cares about the court he will retire shortly after.
Click to expand...
This is true, however i beleave they don't want to wait or go through the confirmation process when they can try to make the court in there own image right away.
 
JDL said:
This is true, however i beleave they don't want to wait or go through the confirmation process when they can try to make the court in there own image right away.
Click to expand...
They have to go through the confirmation process either way.
But to expand the court they need to get the house on board - and they know packing the court would mean massive losses in the following election (probably before they could fill the expanded seats)
 
pastera said:
The next president will very likely appoint anywhere from one to three replacements for conservatives on the court - They don't need to pack the court by increasing the number of justices.

If Trump wins then Alito and Thomas need to quickly plan their exits.
And if Roberts actually cares about the court he will retire shortly after.
Click to expand...
And now we know who the next President will be.

Whew!!
 
JFR2 said:
All I want for Christmas is a Snope cert!

-JR
Click to expand...

Could you imagine how bad Maura's 2025 would be? Have to give up the illegals while claiming they are valuable citizens (depsite us paying $ to house them in hotels and feed them - how are they valuable citizens???). Have to allow any firearm "in common use" in teh UnCommonwealth? The poor old gal will keel over and die with that 1-2 punch.
 
Dennis in MA said:
Could you imagine how bad Maura's 2025 would be? Have to give up the illegals while claiming they are valuable citizens (depsite us paying $ to house them in hotels and feed them - how are they valuable citizens???). Have to allow any firearm "in common use" in teh UnCommonwealth? The poor old gal will keel over and die with that 1-2 punch.
Click to expand...
9b54cn.jpg
 

Similar threads

Garland v. VanDerStok
Replies
0
Views
103
lutstribe
L
SCOTUS denies cert on two 2A cases.
Replies
2
Views
360
MickeyD’s
M
Run to Home Base Fundraising
Replies
1
Views
79
Severus Semi-Auto Snape
Severus Semi-Auto Snape
What states still have “94” AWB in place?
Replies
10
Views
526
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
  • Poll Poll
Which gun to shoot for complete gun n00b?
2
Replies
56
Views
745
Cuz
Cuz
Back
Top Bottom