-
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/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Appeal brief filed Worman v. Healy (GOAL lawsuit)
- Thread starter Mike S
- Start date
JayMcB
NES Member
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2011
- Messages
- 22,398
- Likes
- 109,502
babygorilla
NES Member
I should think that they're applying intermediate instead of the required direct scrutiny to a consititutional right would help bring this (and the other cases like this, i.e. NJ, MD, CA, HI if I recall) to the SCOTUS attention.
Procedure would be an appeal to the same circuit En Banc first (which is the whole court, not just 3 judges)
The feds have put ma. Judges on notice with the Newton nitwit,
About what they think of the activist judges antics based not on law,but politics.
Let’s hope that “chilling effect” that queen Maura complained about the action of United States Attorney for the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Continues.
About what they think of the activist judges antics based not on law,but politics.
Let’s hope that “chilling effect” that queen Maura complained about the action of United States Attorney for the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Continues.
I don’t trust Scotus and there’s no guarantee that they’ll even hear this case. Let’s hope though
I can’t wait to see this witch crying into her rainbow sneakers
While we're dreaming, I want to read in this order:
1) a majority opinion from Gorsuch tearing Healy a new one
2) a dissenting opinion from RBG exposing her unconstitutional bias
3) Trump's 2020 victory speech
4) RBG's obituary after a heart attack from #4
5) Trump's next SCOTUS appointment
We haven’t got a Stark’s chance at Winterfell of that happening, lol!!!!! But yes, that would be Epic!!!!! Let’s hope..
Um, it's 29 pages, double-spaced.
On net, I think it's a good thing. The ruling is so bad, and so poorly reasoned (especially compared to the CA mag ban case), I think it's just tee'ing up a case for SCOTUS.
What infuriates me is that we pulled a panel with a Reagan appointee and an H.W. Bush appointee and they both voted against us. And I'm wondering how it is that Souter ends up on all the gun cases - aren't these supposed to be randomly assigned? It seems to me that Souter has a strong anti-gun bias and they're putting him on these cases deliberately.
VetteGirlMA
NES Member
Breyer is 81. If we're talking about scotus appointments I would love to have a 2 for the price of 1 and a 7-2 court.
GOAL just tweeted that the court tossed it.
Healey wins again.
“The record contains ample evidence of the unique dangers posed by the proscribed weapons,” read the appeals court ruling.
Healey, in a statement, welcomed Friday’s development.
“Once again, the courts have agreed that the people of Massachusetts have the right to protect themselves, their communities, and their schools by banning these deadly weapons. Today’s decision by the First Circuit is a defeat for the gun lobby and a victory for families across the nation,” she said.
Healey wins again.
“The record contains ample evidence of the unique dangers posed by the proscribed weapons,” read the appeals court ruling.
Healey, in a statement, welcomed Friday’s development.
“Once again, the courts have agreed that the people of Massachusetts have the right to protect themselves, their communities, and their schools by banning these deadly weapons. Today’s decision by the First Circuit is a defeat for the gun lobby and a victory for families across the nation,” she said.
Last edited:
amm5061
NES Member
The irony and hypocrisy in that statement is just so ridiculous it makes my head want to explode.
At some point the Democrats get exposed for playing Weekend at Bernie's with RBG's corpse for the last year, Trump appoints another Supreme Court justice, we get our rights vindicated, and 20 million progressive heads explode across the country.
Similar threads
