Comm2A files against the AG on LCIs, Draper v Coakley

[JoseyWales]

Because of Bruen, can a new suit be brought fighting this (Draper v. CoakleyHealey) again?

 

[SJan]

If Draper has since acquired a Glock via private party FA-10 personal transfer, is there now no standing?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Standing is not the issue as we could always get another plaintiff. The issue is that pesky res judicata thing.

 

[Chevy 2 65]

Glockster30

First of, thank you for the support! Thank you to all of you who have been following this matter closely.

To clarify, my rant yesterday was not directed to any of you Constitution loving and Rule-of-Law following individuals. I know that you all know how the system is rigged--one need only mention the key words "firearm", "gun" or "Second Amendment" and political and judicial minds melt immediately and that case is doomed.

I do not want anyone to think that this is over--at least as far as I'm concerned. As long as you are with me I'll continue this fight! They started with two attorneys at the AG's office, which by the end of the appeal ended with 10-12, including those in support of the Brady Center and the Law Center (there are some on the service list who do not appear on the briefs or in the 1st Circuit's opinion). We've obviously struck a nerve.

Stay strong. I'm in this for the long run...

Best,
Alex

Thank You !

 

[pastera]

Standing is not the issue as we could always get another plaintiff. The issue is that pesky res judicata thing.

I thought that a ruling from a higher court that materially effected a case could bring standing for review?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I thought that a ruling from a higher court that materially effected a case could bring standing for review?

The problem is that the SCOTUS decision did not directly address the issue of "safety standards / consumer protection" regulating what brands of guns could be sold, particularly when models with similar capability that are allegedly "safer" are available for sale. A decision on that issue could go either way.

 

[pastera]

The problem is that the SCOTUS decision did not directly address the issue of "safety standards / consumer protection" regulating what brands of guns could be sold, particularly when models with similar capability that are allegedly "safer" are available for sale. A decision on that issue could go either way.

Concur - got cases mixed up in my head.
The AG non-list is one that I haven't followed closely. The only way out of this one is getting rid of the federal restrictions on out of home state purchase.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

If Draper has since acquired a Glock via private party FA-10 personal transfer, is there now no standing?

True, unless he wants to buy another.

 

[Chevy 2 65]

The AG should create a list of what cars people can buy. or what brand of milk, bread etc..

 

[pastera]

The AG should create a list of what cars people can buy. or what brand of milk, bread etc..

What cars you can buy are regulated in Mass - new cars must meet the extra California BS.

 

[Chevy 2 65]

What cars you can buy are regulated in Mass - new cars must meet the extra California BS.

Not what I mean. No F250 it's too large and dangerous, no diesel engines of any kind allowed. etc..

 

[Mass-diver]

Some many issues with the AG’s regs consumer protection regs starting with the fact that many MA PDs carry Glocks because they are such a high quality, safe choice.

 

[pastera]

Not what I mean. No F250 it's too large and dangerous, no diesel engines of any kind allowed. etc..

Already happening - Hyundai was allocating ALL of their EV and PHEV production to the states that pull this shit so they can hit the average fleet economy numbers for vehicles sold in that state.
Pretty certain other manufacturers do the same.

 

[Hoover]

Standing is not the issue as we could always get another plaintiff. The issue is that pesky res judicata thing.

Count 2 of Draper v coakley used the two step intermediate scrutiny which Thomas said SCOTUS rejects. A new suit would be allowed on that.

 

[Hoover]

California has a handgun roster too. There is a pending suit there Renna vs bonta

 

[Chevy 2 65]

California has a handgun roster too. There is a pending suit there Renna vs bonta

How's it looking?

 

[Coyote33]

Concur - got cases mixed up in my head.
The AG non-list is one that I haven't followed closely. The only way out of this one is getting rid of the federal restrictions on out of home state purchase.

I think the way out is to make any laws, rules, and regulations that apply to regular citizens also apply to police departments. I'm not sure how or if Bruen even affects any of that, but removing that exception/exemption will certainly change attitudes from that sector, who the state loves to have on their side.

 

[PappyM3]

I think the way out is to make any laws, rules, and regulations that apply to regular citizens also apply to police departments.

That would be amazing. But would never happen. The king’s men will always get special treatment, if not for overpowering execution of state violence, then for the special treatment that keeps them in the pocket of the policy makers.

 

[Hoover]

How's it looking?

It’s at the district court level. A ways to go. A lot of gun cases at district and circuit courts (and the 4 at SCOTUS) were on hold while SCOTUS heard NYSRPA. They’re all restarting now and we’ll also see new cases filed against California, Delaware, New Jersey and New York.

RosterLawsuit.com: FPC 2A Challenge to California’s Handgun Roster

RosterLawsuit.com: 2A & 14A lawsuit challenging California’s "Roster" Handgun Ban and self-manufacturing handgun ban.

www.firearmspolicy.org

Renna v. Becerra - Michel & Associates, P.C.

Case Name: Lana Rae Renna; Danielle Jaymes; Hannah Spousta; Laura Schwartz; Michael Schwartz; Richard Bailey; John Klier; Justin Smith; John Phillips; PWGG, L.P.; Cheryl Prince; Darin Prince; North County Shooting Center, Inc.; Ryan Peterson; Gunfighter Tactical, LLC; Firearms Policy Coalition...

michellawyers.com

 

[pastera]

I think the way out is to make any laws, rules, and regulations that apply to regular citizens also apply to police departments. I'm not sure how or if Bruen even affects any of that, but removing that exception/exemption will certainly change attitudes from that sector, who the state loves to have on their side.

We will very likely not succeed in removing exceptions for special places - everything else is up for grabs though

 

[Rob Boudrie]

We will very likely not succeed in removing exceptions for special places - everything else is up for grabs though

There may be victories to new exceptions if they are overly broad and/or the legislative intent is clear that the motivation was to undermine the 2A rather than apply the sensitive place logic only in very specific circumstances.

 

[drgrant]

There may be victories to new exceptions if they are overly broad and/or the legislative intent is clear that the motivation was to undermine the 2A rather than apply the sensitive place logic only in very specific circumstances.

Also the NY logic about things like public transit being a “sensitive place “ is a bit dubious. So basically they’re saying poors can’t carry guns.

 

[Hoover]

Also the NY logic about things like public transit being a “sensitive place “ is a bit dubious. So basically they’re saying poors can’t carry guns.

Beyond the poor, I think the subway, public transit is their way of making NYC a sensitive place and no carry. The subway is so necessary for anyone not wealthy because so few have cars in the city.

 

[Lank]

There may be victories to new exceptions if they are overly broad and/or the legislative intent is clear that the motivation was to undermine the 2A rather than apply the sensitive place logic only in

And if a judge agrees right?

 

[Chevy 2 65]

Also the NY logic about things like public transit being a “sensitive place “ is a bit dubious. So basically they’re saying poors can’t carry guns.

All of it is dubious

 

[Mesatchornug]

That would be amazing. But would never happen. The king’s men will always get special treatment, if not for overpowering execution of state violence, then for the special treatment that keeps them in the pocket of the policy makers.

So you're saying we shouldn't try to strike LEOSA?

 

[PappyM3]

…So basically they’re saying poors can’t carry guns.

That’s at the root of a lot of gun control.

 

[M1911]

Also the NY logic about things like public transit being a “sensitive place “ is a bit dubious. So basically they’re saying poors can’t carry guns.

Which is the entire goal of discretionary licensing in the first place…

 

[Coyote33]

Which is the entire goal of discretionary licensing in the first place…

Upon first reading this, I thought you were talking about making the police equal to everyone else. I thought I read somewhere that was a part of this Bruen deal. Maybe not. It's a question as much as anything else.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Also the NY logic about things like public transit being a “sensitive place “ is a bit dubious. So basically they’re saying poors can’t carry guns.

The list of places - businesses without a permission to be armed notice; times square; etc. are sufficient to render the pre-Bruen NYC "special full carry" permits nearly useless, as well as the unrestricted non-NYC NY permits help by upstaters many of who live in what are almost "shall issue" by practice. There isn't really an appeal resistant mechanism to grant "first class" permits to the important and "second class permits" to the ordinaries. To those who used their position, fame or power to get the old NYC full carry permits - welcome to being treated like everyone else.