Comm2A announces Hightower v. Boston Right to Carry case in MA

[IPSC_DRL]

I was under the impression that this might change things regarding Boston LTC-As and how they (don't) issue them. Former police or not, wouldn't the same rules apply to all citizens?

Never read Animal Farm I guess.

 

[pjorg]

There is another one where they say 2% of all licenses are denied. Clearly the soft denials on restrictions or apps that are never processed are never counted.

Yep. Easy to have low denial rates when you refuse to accept applications you don't like.

 

[terraformer]

Yep. Easy to have low denial rates when you refuse to accept applications you don't like.

Or alter them at will without the submitters blessing.

Ironically, the decision qualifies some of the data it uses:

Given the record presently before the Court - including the fact that under the current statutory scheme, roughly 98% of license to carry applications are granted and only 1% are denied on the basis of unsuitability, First Guida Aff., D. 35-6 at ¶ 7 - the risk of erroneously classifying a suitable applicant as unsuitable appears quite low, and it is difficult to fathom what errors of this kind a pre-revocation hearing would prevent that the written application process and course of judicial review under Mass. Gen. L. c. 140, § 131(f) would not.

 

[bill o]

Help me understand this...

Third, although Hightower asserts that all she wants to be able to do is carry her .38 caliber revolver, a regular-capacity firearm,
either concealed or unconcealed, for self-defense purposes, Pl. Opp. Memo 45 at 7-9 (“Hightower
wants a permit that would allow her to carry a handgun - the one she had seized from her - for self
defense . . . Hightower might prefer carrying concealed, but her testimony flatly rejects [an] attempt
to convert this case into one that turns on concealment. It does not”),13 she has never sought and has
never been denied a narrower license, such as a restricted Class A license or a Class B license, that
would allow her to do so.

I think I can cut out the filler in the middle to get it down to this:

Third, although Hightower asserts that all she wants to be able to do is carry her .38 caliber revolver, a regular-capacity firearm, she has never sought and has never been denied a narrower license, such as a restricted Class A license or a Class B license, that would allow her to do so.

Is the judge saying here that Hightower would be able to lawfully carry her .38 outside the home on a restricted Class A or B, since it's a regular-capacity as opposed to a high-capacity firearm? Or am I missing something?

 

[jar]

Is the judge saying here that Hightower would be able to lawfully carry her .38 outside the home on a restricted Class A or B, since it's a regular-capacity as opposed to a high-capacity firearm? Or am I missing something?

The defendants argued that she could open carry on an LTC-B.

 

[terraformer]

The defendants argued that she could open carry on an LTC-B.

Correct, open carry. This decision has a blend of Peruta's open v. closed carry in it, some of NY's "That's OK, it's guns and rational basis is just fine as a result" crap and a little of MD's "what permit denials" BS in it to boot.

 

[neEEGuru]

Nothing to see here..... move onto the appeal

 

[Coyote33]

...Ironically, the decision qualifies some of the data it uses:

Given the record presently before the Court

How come the court was not given any "contrary" data?

 

[terraformer]

How come the court was not given any "contrary" data?

None exists. All we have is anecdotes. Plus, it doesn't matter how many people are effected. No one should have their rights impacted in this manner.

 

[terraformer]

BTW, it's official. Alan is appealing.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

There was a minor but significant difference between one of the depositions and what was plead in the city's filings. In depositions the FRB testified that just less than 60% of the LTC/As issued by the BPD were 'unrestricted'. However, the city mis-stated this in their motion stating instead that nearly 60% of LTC/As issued to Boston residents were 'unrestricted'. The dis-connect here is BPD members who live outside of Boston and get their LTCs from the department. It's difficult to quantify this number. The knowledgeable folks I know have no idea and think that fewer than 50% of the department's members may have LTCs.

Again, this result was expected. The only thing that was marginally helpful is that the court linked suitability to the unrestricted LTC/A. She didn't explicitly rule out suitability in the issuance of an LTC/B or a restricted LTC/A, but that was the implication.

This actually has some value as the state has consistently maintained that there is not right to any license since in-home possession of a firearm is no illegal. (and yes, we have a ready response for this). Of course they don't acknowledge that if you don't have a permit the police will take your guns because you need a permit under Chap 140, but they won't prosecute your because 269-10(a) creates and exemption for residential possession.

Open carry is also interesting here as we all know open-carry is not tolerated. Three time in open court the city made clear that Hightower could open carry with a LTC/B or a restricted LTC/A - as long as she open carried an unloaded gun in a locked case! Yes, that's the city's position, I was there.

Yet another case that moves up to it's respective circuit.

 

[jar]

This actually has some value as the state has consistently maintained that there is not right to any license since in-home possession of a firearm is no illegal. (and yes, we have a ready response for this). Of course they don't acknowledge that if you don't have a permit the police will take your guns because you need a permit under Chap 140, but they won't prosecute your because 269-10(a) creates and exemption for residential possession.

I've been saying since McDonald came down that a challenge to discretion on restricted As was almost a slam dunk. Assuming our side prevails in the pending SCOTUS bear cases, it's probably a waste of resources to challenge it separately.

Open carry is also interesting here as we all know open-carry is not tolerated. Three time in open court the city made clear that Hightower could open carry with a LTC/B or a restricted LTC/A - as long as she open carried an unloaded gun in a locked case! Yes, that's the city's position, I was there.

I was there too, and it took all I had to not laugh out loud.

Yet another case that moves up to it's respective circuit.

Donation toward funding appeal en-route.

 

[LTCRN]

So how long before it reaches the Appelate Court and a decision is rendered? This is infuriating pure B.S., and I'm sure I am speaking for hundreds, if not thousands, just like me who have B.S. restrictions based on someone's opinion, not facts.

 

[terraformer]

So how long before it reaches the Appelate Court and a decision is rendered? This is infuriating pure B.S., and I'm sure I am speaking for hundreds, if not thousands, just like me who have B.S. restrictions based on someone's opinion, not facts.

So, 30 days until notice of appeal is filed. From there, it could be 6 months. It could also be longer. Patience is a virtue right now as this issue is not getting settled quickly anywhere in this country.

 

[jar]

So, 30 days until notice of appeal is filed. From there, it could be 6 months. It could also be longer. Patience is a virtue right now as this issue is not getting settled quickly anywhere in this country.

I think it's pretty likely that the appeal will get stayed pending a SCOTUS decision in whichever of the 4 2A cases they take up this term. My money is on a decision in late 2012 / early 2013 after a SCOTUS decision in June 2012.

 

[TheRoland]

I think it's pretty likely that the appeal will get stayed pending a SCOTUS decision in whichever of the 4 2A cases they take up this term. My money is on a decision in late 2012 / early 2013 after a SCOTUS decision in June 2012.

To my knowledge no certs have been granted for 2A cases yet this term. I'm a pessimist, but am bracing for a really disastrous year.

EDIT: Apparently, the SCOTUS has asked for further filings on the three pending 2A cert petitions they were considering this week? Trying to find more information.

EDIT: I guess we may find out about Willians v. Maryland on Monday. If cert is not granted in that case, this year will likely suck.

 

[terraformer]

EDIT: Apparently, the SCOTUS has asked for further filings on the three pending 2A cert petitions they were considering this week? Trying to find more information.

Where did you hear this?

 

[jar]

To my knowledge no certs have been granted for 2A cases yet this term. I'm a pessimist, but am bracing for a really disastrous year.

EDIT: Apparently, the SCOTUS has asked for further filings on the three pending 2A cert petitions they were considering this week? Trying to find more information.

EDIT: I guess we may find out about Willians v. Maryland on Monday. If cert is not granted in that case, this year will likely suck.

There are 4 cases going on at the moment. Williams v Maryland was scheduled for conference (where the justices look at cases and decide whether or not to take them) on this past Monday (9/26). This was the first conference back from their summer break, so there were a ton of cases to look at. They announced a bunch of cases they took on Tuesday, but Williams wasn't on the list. They will announce denied cases early next week. Everything else goes back in the pool to be rescheduled for another conference. Masciandaro, Lowery, and Powell are all pending more filings before they get considered at a conference. My guess is Williams won't be denied this time around, and they'll hold it until all of the filings are in in the other 3 2A cases, and then schedule all of them for the same conference. I think they'll grant at least one and hold on to the rest. Once the decision(s) is/are released in the case(s) they take (June 2012), they'll GVR the rest. GVR is short for Grant, Vacate, and Remand, in other words, telling the lower court, 'here, read this new decision and try again in light of it'. That's what happened to the 2nd circuit nunchuku case (Maloney v. Rice) after McDonald came down.

 

[jar]

Where did you hear this?

I think he's talking about the responses to cert petitions requested in Masciandaro and Lowery. There was an article somewhere that mistakenly implied another filing was pending in Williams.

The requested response in Masciandaro is due 10/11 and Lowery on 10/12. I believe that 30 day extensions are available for the asking for both of these. I can't find a SCOTUS docket for Comm. v Powell.

 

[PaulD]

I think he's talking about the responses to cert petitions requested in Masciandaro and Lowery. There was an article somewhere that mistakenly implied another filing was pending in Williams.

The requested response in Masciandaro is due 10/11 and Lowery on 10/12. I believe that 30 day extensions are available for the asking for both of these. I can't find a SCOTUS docket for Comm. v Powell.

Jar, you've become quite the jail house lawyer.

 

[jar]

Jar, you've become quite the jail house lawyer.

I've been working off and on for a while on an article on "The state of the 2A litigation union for the layman", but it's a lot harder than I first thought it would be.

 

[TheRoland]

I think he's talking about the responses to cert petitions requested in Masciandaro and Lowery. There was an article somewhere that mistakenly implied another filing was pending in Williams.
.

I was referring to Masciandaro and Lowery. SCOTUSblog implied that Williams was in the same boat, which was news to me. They may have been including Powell.

My second edit was upon checking and seeing that Williams was still was on the 9/26 conference schedule. Hence, we should still find out if Williams is pushed or denied on Monday.

My guess is Williams won't be denied this time around, and they'll hold it until all of the filings are in in the other 3 2A cases, and then schedule all of them for the same conference...GVR

This is basically my best-case-scenario. I'm not sure I'm actually expecting it; I'm concerned about a real effort to derail this from the McDonald dissent. I'm basing this concern on general pessimism.

 

[terraformer]

I think he's talking about the responses to cert petitions requested in Masciandaro and Lowery. There was an article somewhere that mistakenly implied another filing was pending in Williams.

The requested response in Masciandaro is due 10/11 and Lowery on 10/12. I believe that 30 day extensions are available for the asking for both of these. I can't find a SCOTUS docket for Comm. v Powell.

OK, I thought he meant something other than the above. Powell will not happen any time soon. It was just petitioned on the 29th.

 

[terraformer]

http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2011/09/30/more-district-court-opinion-failures/

Some coverage in the blogosphere.

 

[neEEGuru]

http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2011/09/30/more-district-court-opinion-failures/

Some coverage in the blogosphere.

From this ^ ;

Comment Policy

.... happy to tolerate a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but I'm not going to tolerate nastiness, vitriol, or excessively snippy snarkiness (say that three times fast) toward the author(s) or other commenters. Regular snarkiness is fine, especially directed toward Brady Campaign folks, or certain NRA F rated politicians. You may make your case passionately, but civility is expected.

 

[TLB]

Not a lawyer, but seems to me that Willaims may have been a bridge too far since he did not have a permit. I believe the SCOTUS will not do away with the permitting process, as they have indicated that the mentally ill and felons should not have the right.

The Masciandaro case seems to be the best fit of the four for pushing the right carry beyond the home (which the state courts have been claiming previous SCOTUS decisions did not do).

I am hopeful based on what I have read that they will hear Masciandaro, since similar to Williams, the defendant had originally filed a waiver to respond, but the SCOTUS has requested a response. The date for the response has been extended to Oct 18th.

We shall see.

Tim

 

[terraformer]

Notice of appeal was filed this evening. On towards the 1st Circuit.

 

[terraformer]

The case was docketed today. The first circuit docket number is 11-2281.

 

[FromTheAshes777]

Anyone have any updates on this case? This could have a really big impact.

 

[terraformer]

The city filed their reply brief. I haven't had time to read it. It will be three weeks before anything is due by Gura.