Comm2A, SAF, GOAL and FPC file against Baker admin on shop closures

[JJ4]

Back to the start - I thought it was interesting how he addressed the citizen letter to him. He said that it seems the citizen doesn't seem to understand that non-parties don't usually get to address the court. However, he felt that the parties had a right to know what information he had been exposed to. So he put the letter in the docket for that purpose.

Hindsight 20/20: The plaintiffs should have proposed an order that contained the exact social distancing requirements that other retailers are following. Just referencing them was the downfall I think? So we were stuck working with the state's proposed order.

 

[DrewG8572]

There are ~1.5 million LTC holders in MA. Let's say there's 100 firearms stores in MA, open 7 days a week for 12 hours a day at 4 transactions per hour. It would take 45 weeks for every LTC holder to be able to get an appointment. Nope no infringement here.

I misread the article - there are 433,000 licensed gun holders.

 

[soam]

I would bet most gun shops will not defy the 4 appointments per hour.

Right, but for stores that haven't filled their 4 appointment slots for that hour they could offer "on-demand appointments".

 

[p.tice]

I worry that with this conclusion, the state found out exactly how far they can infringe on gun rights. Even worse, the court legitimized it. I'm sure the AG's office knew we would contest the closure of gun stores. They also knew how to draft an order that the court would see as a compromise. So basically, what they got out of this was the closing of gun stores for a large part of the emergency order. Then when they open, it is on their terms and leaves the power in their hands. Even worse, they could let this stay in effect for a long time and leave it until the last "business" to open up entirely under Baker's re-opening plan.

 

[Jason Flare]

Right, but for stores that haven't filled their 4 appointment slots for that hour they could offer "on-demand appointments".

Of course.

But I find it hard to imagine gun shops won’t be swamped with customers.

 

[Yazz]

Back in your cages little animals the State will feed you crumbs when it sees fit.

 

[EJFudd]

So, the state's proposal was accepted, but the state didn't want either proposal to be accepted.

Funny how that works. Perhaps I am feeling optimistic, but I see some wiggle room in the appointments & transactions bullshit. Just got to bring your friends along so that no appointment possibly goes to waste and make sure that your "transaction" is a plentiful one.

 

[Engineer]

IANAL but not addressing the 4 appointments an hour seems to me to border on malpractice. simple concept. Grocery stores limited to selling food to four people an hour?

I fully understand this sentiment BUT.... Its not really fair to lay this solely at the feet of the the Judge.
He gave our counsel several opportunities to raise objections to MA's proposed 10 Hygienic conditions for the TRO.
We fumbled and didn't really seem to understand the opportunity being offered or were under-prepared to make strong argument with facts and details to back-up the arguments.

In absent of strong, factual, well articulated counter arguments, the Judge really had no reason to basis to change those elements of the TRO.

Still, a Ltd Tactical Win with seeming support for Not Issuing a Stay prior to Argument on the Merits and rationale that seem to indicate the Judge believes that any argument on the merits would be successful.

 

[84ta406]

Shops should start doing "Amazon boxes" for non FFL stuff.

"Your lower parts kit and barrel are in locker 7 code 1234. "

 

[Boston4567]

It's a temporary restraining order. As far as I know the ruling does not set precedent, it provides temporary relief until the judge can do a more thorough ruling on the merits.

We've gone from 0 stores open, to stores being open with limitations. The needle is moving in the right direction.

Yeah, this. I don't understand why plaintiffs didn't push much harder on the four transaction per hour rule. That said, the standards for a TRO are very stringent (I'm actually not totally clear whether this is a TRO or an injunction), and this is a ruling that I feel confident won't be overturned by the First Circus.

You have to figure the judge is playing the long game here. He doesn't want to issue an overbroad ruling and have it be completely overturned. This is not the end. It's the beginning of a long process. Especially if it's just a TRO, and an injunction is to follow, there is room for changing it.

 

[Engineer]

You think this is a victory?

Sorry but this is a loss.

Sets up a bad precedent that still violates our rights.

How the hell is that a victory?

Again - I understand this assessment. I will offer that this is a TRO and was NOT a ruling after hearing on the merits. IANAL but only ruling on Merits create precedent.
We're still in the 'opening round dance' on this event.

 

[Mesatchornug]

Because the state didn't want to let shops open at all. The judge told both sides to submit proposals for letting shops open with restrictions, and if the state hadn't submitted something then the judge may have just accepted the plaintiff's proposal.

So, the state's proposal was accepted, but the state didn't want either proposal to be accepted.

Specifically, the judge said that the Plaintiff's proposal was inappropriate in that it doesn't follow the proper format. If the State hadn't submitted anything, we would have found ourselves in a bigger clusterf*** this morning.

 

[soam]

Yup. If anything this tells the state they can't single out gun rights for complete banning just because there's an "emergency".

 

[csobrien]

Also, “Bah Gawd!! That’s Comm2A’s music!”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.220544/gov.uscourts.mad.220544.80.0.pdf

Looks like the “#Essential, because Stone Cold says so” proposal wasn’t what Woodlock was looking for. I thought it was a lot of fun, but maybe copy/pasting the rules for Home Depot would’ve worked better.

I feel like the 2014-2015 Seahawks. A great defense and elite ground game gets you a short second and goal for the win. Then, we inexplicably turn away from what got us to said position and throw up...what exactly was put out there? If Plaintiffs weren’t going to present a detailed proposal, it seems important to push back on at least the most burdensome aspects of the State’s proposal.

TL;DR:

 

[67ray]

From what I heard on the call and written here, I call it a win. We will all be at gun shops Saturday

What is sad is that the AG even when they have no case will just keep going and going and going. Another reason why ppl despise lawyers. They don't admit defeat, they jsut keep using parliamentary-like procedure to delay and stall and hope to win not by merit by by fatigue of the opposing side. It's repulsive.

Am glad the Federal judge slapped down the stay motion before they even filed it. He is serious about no more delays and acting the partt.

.

 

[Bladerunner]

Again - I understand this assessment. I will offer that this is a TRO and was NOT a ruling after hearing on the merits. IANAL but only ruling on Merits create precedent.
We're still in the 'opening round dance' on this event.

Fair enough, I guess I'll wait until next year after restrictions are lifted to hear the final ruling.

 

[Mesatchornug]

Read the OP. I said the fault lays with our representation and not the judge. Malpractice applies to the attorneys.

To argue that it's malpractice is a bit far.

It would have been good if the Plaintiff attorneys had pressed harder, but this was also not the time to be attack dogs. I'd have appreciated if they laid harder on the fact that ammo is almost a direct comparison to alcohol. I'd also prefer if they'd put a greater emphasis on the variable sizes of gun shops.

But I wasn't the one in front of the judge, so there's only so much Monday-morning QBing will achieve.

 

[Mesatchornug]

There are ~1.5 million LTC holders in MA. Let's say there's 100 firearms stores in MA, open 7 days a week for 12 hours a day at 4 transactions per hour. It would take 45 weeks for every LTC holder to be able to get an appointment. Nope no infringement here.

There are well over 100 FFLs in MA, though. The Mill has what, 55?

Further, the case is about people being blocked from the core right. That means people that don't own a firearm already. Since that's limited to folks with a license but without firearms, the legal relief can be pretty narrow and still serve those people.

Does it suck for all of us? Absolutely. But that's not what this case is about.

 

[Mesatchornug]

The place I really think they dropped the ball is the ranges. Especially with golf courses opening literally during the call. They should have been better prepared there. But now we get to actually enter that into whatever statement we're making about "physical distancing" at clubs, both indoor and outdoor.

 

[soam]

The place I really think they dropped the ball is the ranges. Especially with golf courses opening literally during the call. They should have been better prepared there. But now we get to actually enter that into whatever statement we're making about "physical distancing" at clubs, both indoor and outdoor.

Yeah, that was disappointing. Hopefully the next hearing goes in our favor and there will be a blanket "ranges can open with these guidelines in place" ruling.

 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

There are something like 350 FFLs in MA, but some are auction houses, walmarts etc

There are well over 100 FFLs in MA, though. The Mill has what, 55?

Further, the case is about people being blocked from the core right. That means people that don't own a firearm already. Since that's limited to folks with a license but without firearms, the legal relief can be pretty narrow and still serve those people.

Does it suck for all of us? Absolutely. But that's not what this case is about.

 

[EJFudd]

There are well over 100 FFLs in MA, though. The Mill has what, 55?

The Mill gonna be a busy place on Saturday!

Better be careful or it might capsize and sink like Guam.

+++ www.youtube.com/watch?v=cesSRfXqS1Q +++

 

[Drix]

Hindsight 20/20: The plaintiffs should have proposed an order that contained the exact social distancing requirements that other retailers are following. Just referencing them was the downfall I think? So we were stuck working with the state's proposed order.

You'd think we would have learned from this with the state pointing towards the federal AWB text- by pointing at the guidance the state can just change the guidance.

We will all be at gun shops Saturday

I doubt I'll be one of the 50 people able to get an appointment at my FFL on saturday.

 

[milktree]

There are ~1.5 million LTC holders in MA.

Where did you get that number? It seems high by a factor of at least two.

Based on Comm2A’s 2017 scorecard report, there were 83,710 renewals and 60,984 new LTCs issued. Assuming nobody fails to renew, and ’18 and ’19 were the same as ’17, that’s only about 685k LTC holders. (six times 83,710 renewals + three times 60,984 new LTCs issued)

 

[kevin9]

One small step...
Sounds like there is room for improvement in plaintiffs' counsel relative to preparing submitted materials and on-their-feet arguments. Maybe they need more paralegal help with prep work and to getting the little things right.
Sounds like state counsel is more competent in the little things (ex. submitting materials in proper format) but has no case.

 

[soam]

Once someone can get a copy of the order please post it here. There's some shop owners I want to make sure see it ASAP.

 

[BriMac]

So what happens if the State appeals the order? Back to shut down ?

 

[426wedge]

40 percent on the ranges? My club has over a thousand members, maybe more. So does that mean you can have 400 people there? On a busy day there is nowhere near that. so if this is the case, what does it matter?

 

[cstockwell]

Liveblog 2.0 starts now...

10:05am: Judge is referencing email from Brian Miranda that was entered into the record, emphasizing it shouldn't have been sent and will have no impact on his ruling, but he entered it in because the parties are entitled to know what he's exposed to
10:07am: Judge says Plaintiff's proposed form of order is too open-ended for a TRO/preliminary injunction
10:11am: Focus in first hearing was on justification for governor's order, the response he got from gov's office provided his public statements but response doesn't provide support/reasoning for governor's view, judge is left with "unhappy experience of trying to tease out" a justification.
10:13am: Turning to state's proposed form of order... judge wants to know if plaintiffs have objections to proposed form of order
10:16am: Judge is asking if plaintiffs object to hygiene and scheduling requirements. Comm2a lawyer is saying no... I'm worried he's missing what the judge means by "scheduling". Stores shouldn't have their hands tied with regards to scheduling.
10:20am: I'm worried this isn't going well so far. Why isn't the Comm2a lawyer objecting to the appointment-only and 4 transactions per hour requirements?
10:25am: State's lawyer is a clown. Keeps spouting off on a hundred different things rather than answering the judge's question. He keeps trying to bring her back and she keeps going off. Started talking about MGL 93A.
10:30am: False alarm. Judge was focused on the 10 hygiene related requirements. He's now narrowing in on the four appointments per hour requirement.
10:35am: Comm2a lawyer is objecting to the four appointments per hour requirement. There are large retailers that shouldn't be limited like this, also an ammo transaction might only take 1-2 minutes.
10:40am: Judge seems to be inclined to allow four transactions per hour. Plaintiffs should be objecting more strongly to the impact of this limit, particularly as it applies to ammo.
10:43am: On to operating hours... Judge is inclined to enter an order that says stores can be open 9am-9pm daily.
10:47am: Judge is worried that there's not enough on the record to act on shooting ranges with enough specificity in the order
10:50am: Parties will be required to make additional filings in regarding shooting ranges to build the record so he can act. Likely to be a week before we get an order. He seems firm on this. TRO/injunction will only apply to shops.
10:51am: Judge doesn't like the idea of two business days for order to take effect. Sounds inclined to get them open before the weekend.
10:55am: Judges doesn't like state's position... "Essential Services" is not the language of constitutional rights. Grilling the state.
10:56am: Judge does not like state's position on 2A in general... taking shots about Caetano, and the fact that the SJC took years to rule after SCOTUS delivered their decision to overturn the stun gun ban.
[Had to step away from 11:00-11:10, not sure what I missed]
11:17am: Judge is comparing preventing newspapers from buying paper, how is that any different than 2A? State: intermediate scrutiny. Judge: Not talking scrutiny. Why do you need this restriction?
11:20am: Judge: "how much burden can we put on constitutional rights, recognizing that they may not be popular among some segments of the public, but htey are constitutional."
11:26am: State is pontificating on the commie cold. Nothing new here.
11:30am: Judge says he's going to enter an order. Because I missed 10 minutes, I'm not sure if the four transactions per hour requirement was addressed. If not, this is a huge lost opportunity. Should be four guns per clerk per hour with fewer or no restrictions on ammo transactions.
11:35am: Judge referenced the four transactions per hour requirement in his closing. Sounds like it's in. The plaintiffs should have pushed much harder on this.
11:46am: Judge still going... just properly articulating his reasoning. Nothing new to note.
11:54am: State is moving to stay the order. Judge says no. He is going to write up memorandum and doesn't want precipitous appeal without a record. Not clear what that means, it seems like he should have said it's too early for a stay and to request it in writing once the order is entered. I think he may have left the door open to an immediate appeal.
11:56am: Apparently I missed this part, but shops open at noon on Saturday
12:00pm: Talking about procedural matters and next steps
12:03pm: That's a wrap.

Thank you for doing this!!! It was very helpful to many of us not on the call.

 

[DrewG8572]

There are something like 350 FFLs in MA, but some are auction houses, walmarts etc

Hmm I was surprised to find a search of fflgundealers.net turned up 600 FFLs in MA. I suspect many are not actually shops and are individuals, wal-marts, manufactureres, etc.

Where did you get that number? It seems high by a factor of at least two.

Based on Comm2A’s 2017 scorecard report, there were 83,710 renewals and 60,984 new LTCs issued. Assuming nobody fails to renew, and ’18 and ’19 were the same as ’17, that’s only about 685k LTC holders. (six times 83,710 renewals + three times 60,984 new LTCs issued)

Wallace sees the increasing number of gun licenses in Massachusetts as a slow return to how things were before a major legislative overhaul of gun laws in 1998 banned large-capacity magazines and made obtaining a license more difficult. He said there were more than 1.2 million licensed gun owners in the state before the legislation and a little more than 200,000 after.

As debate over gun control wears on, more and more South Shore residents are getting licensed

In 20 communities south of Boston, the number of licenses issued from 2013 to 2018 was almost 50 percent higher than the number issued in the six years

www.patriotledger.com