Fighting The Attorney General....

Joined
Mar 8, 2007
Messages
13,560
Likes
2,359
Location
Land of The Sheep - Home of The Grave
Feedback: 13 / 0 / 0
Just a point of curiosity for all the "legal eagles" who peruse Northeast Shooters. I was thinking about the recent thread involving Bass Pro Shops, the Attorney General and "the list that is not a list" and wondered: How much would it cost roughly in legal fees to fight the Attorney General on this in court? Tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions?

Is this something that could be a table turner for oh say the ACLU to fight? Do you think that a favorable outcome with the DC Gun Ban in the USSC make the governor, legislature and/or the AG's office take a look at softening the restrictions in this state? These are just post Thanksgiving, sitting in my office and pretend I'm working questions. Thanks for reading.
 
I was also thinking about this, I would add the question of is it likely that the AG regs could even be overturned in this type of lawsuit? Say if Bass Pro did fight them.
 
I'm not a legal eagle, but I've been told that since the ball was dropped on appealing a previous lawsuit against the AG, it's difficult to challenge the regs at this point.
 
IANAL, but my best guess would be you'd start at ~$50K and go up from there. The sky is the limit if the AG wanted to use taxpayer money to fight to the bitter end.

It is very difficult to overturn "regulatory" law and I really don't think that the MA judges are impartial enough to do so. As for the ACLU, they would likely take the AG's side and file an amicus curiae brief . . . they certainly would never take the pro-gun side of this fight.

Just one person's opinion.
 
LenS is definitely right about the ACLU, they do not believe the 2A applies to individual people and also support registration and licensing.
 
I'm not a legal eagle, but I've been told that since the ball was dropped on appealing a previous lawsuit against the AG, it's difficult to challenge the regs at this point.

My wife is an attorney and from what her firm charges per hour I am sure you'd be in the 100's of thousands in no time on a case like this.

I meant to ask here before but couldn't find a reference to this AG lawsuit mistake. I do not understand why it can't be brought up again. You can sue anyone for anything. Is this more of a legislative process problem? Can't legislation be re-filed after some amount of time?

Bill
 
IANAL, but my best guess would be you'd start at ~$50K and go up from there. The sky is the limit if the AG wanted to use taxpayer money to fight to the bitter end.

It is very difficult to overturn "regulatory" law and I really don't think that the MA judges are impartial enough to do so. As for the ACLU, they would likely take the AG's side and file an amicus curiae brief . . . they certainly would never take the pro-gun side of this fight.

Just one person's opinion.

Way too low.

Also: serious issues of standing and timeliness.

The best avenue of attack -- which is not to say a great one -- is either to convince an intellectually honest and politically courageous AG that these regs (which derive from either Scott Harbarger or Jimmy Shannon, I cannot recall which) are an abuse of the AG's consumer protection regulation authority (as well, perhaps, of the due process clause), or to convince the legislature of the same and work a statute narrowing the AG's regulatory authority.
 
I'm not a legal eagle, but I've been told that since the ball was dropped on appealing a previous lawsuit against the AG, it's difficult to challenge the regs at this point.

That's why it would have been a good thing if this got to go to court with BP. I guess one of the only ways that it could see court time is if someone were brought up on charges and had to fight that reg.

I'm not a lawyer but used to play one on TV so take that for what it's worth!
 
I believe the second way was tried and has been studied to death.
GC

Senate, No. 212
Presented by: Senator Richard T. Moore
Petition of Richard T. Moore, George N. Peterson, Jr., Bruce E. Tarr, Edward G. Connolly and other members of the General Court for legislation to provide for legislative review of consumer protection regulations.

Order relative to authorizing the joint committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure to make an investigation and study of certain current Senate documents relative to consumer protection and professional licensure.

01/30/06 S Reported from the committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure
01/30/06 S New draft of S186, S187, S194, S197, S206, S212, S214, S233, S239, S240, S252, S253 and S255
01/30/06 S Order reported favorably by committee and referred to the committee on Joint Rules -SJ 1440
02/02/06 S Discharged to the committee on Senate Ethics and Rules -SJ 1446
01/02/07 S No further action taken


The best avenue of attack -- which is not to say a great one -- is either to convince an intellectually honest and politically courageous AG that these regs (which derive from either Scott Harbarger or Jimmy Shannon, I cannot recall which) are an abuse of the AG's consumer protection regulation authority (as well, perhaps, of the due process clause), or to convince the legislature of the same and work a statute narrowing the AG's regulatory authority.
 
Given the fact the lawyer for the big dig is getting about 30 grand a week for Nadda. Go from there. The only company charged to date was some mom and pop with a total liability of 1000 dollars.

Only in Mass!
 
Given the fact the lawyer for the big dig is getting about 30 grand a week for Nadda. Go from there. The only company charged to date was some mom and pop with a total liability of 1000 dollars.

Only in Mass!

I saw that this morning, disgusting.

That said, should that woman have even had to die for them to go after any of the contractors? The abuses in that project were obvious to everyone yet the AG did nothing.

As for fighting the AG gun regs, it's probably better to wait to see what's decided by the SCOTUS in the DC case.
 
Back
Top Bottom