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***
With only Ma/Me/NH/RI/PR in the Circuit, I would agree they did not want to set a Northeast liberal enclave precedent striking it down. That said with the Circuit makeup, MA is the gorilla in the room that carries more weight in its single circuit that the other States possibly combined for many reasons. So perhaps the 1CA ruling remanding it back is with some knowledge from them and a wink wink nod nod in an undocumented meeting with said lower District Judge to go along to get along and not make national case law precedent potential , it will be struck down at the district and limits the liberal anti-2A fallout to a single place/state and judge rather than their circuit and the 1CA avoids the egg on face (possibly) if it went higher......IMHO...Oh yah.. IA(def)NAL
Absolutely they should. The Roster isn’t dead just yet. If they file the same exact (for the most part) case but with the Bruen decision and it’s rules on text, history and tradition then the Roster will be dead. Could take some time but it’ll be worth the wait.If the decision is vacated and remanded back to the district court, FPC can file an injunction to stop enforcement of the roster until the district decides. Shouldn't they?
Happy for any actual or potential victory for our side. Nice avatar btw!Absolutely
The issue with this though is that even if we win at the district court level, MA is most certainly going to appeal the decision back up to CA1. They said as much during oral arguments earlier this week. So I see this as more of them just delaying the inevitable instead of not wanting to create binding precedent on the whole circuit. They know what decision Bruen forces them to make, they just want to avoid having to make that decision as long as possible.With only Ma/Me/NH/RI/PR in the Circuit, I would agree they did not want to set a Northeast liberal enclave precedent striking it down. That said with the Circuit makeup, MA is the gorilla in the room that carries more weight in its single circuit that the other States possibly combined for many reasons. So perhaps the 1CA ruling remanding it back is with some knowledge from them and a wink wink nod nod in an undocumented meeting with said lower District Judge to go along to get along and not make national case law precedent potential , it will be struck down at the district and limits the liberal anti-2A fallout to a single place/state and judge rather than their circuit and the 1CA avoids the egg on face (possibly) if it went higher......IMHO...Oh yah.. IA(def)NAL
Good point. Like I said in my post....The issue with this though is that even if we win at the district court level, MA is most certainly going to appeal the decision back up to CA1. They said as much during oral arguments earlier this week. So I see this as more of them just delaying the inevitable instead of not wanting to create binding precedent on the whole circuit. They know what decision Bruen forces them to make, they just want to avoid having to make that decision as long as possible.
BREAKING: REMANDED! Case to be reheard in light of Bruen!! Great outcome considering the panel makeup.
View: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1644434376107651093
-JR
Many people will try to dump their Glocks now for as much as they can now. If this is struck down lots of people will see their perceived value tumble. Buyers who didn't want to 'go around the roster' would routinely buy 'old Glocks' for a substantial markup.Is this why there is a shit load of GLOCKS for sale even on this site?
Interesting the court was told to "rehear" the case rather than "issue a new decision consistent with Bruen".Instead of ruling the decision unconstitutional and striking it down completely, they vacate and remand back to the district court. How long before the district rules (again) on the case? Yes, it’s a win that they didn’t uphold the earlier decision but they didn’t strike it down either. The courts move far too slow.
Any limit to how many times they can do this while waiting for a newly packed SCOTUS?Interesting the court was told to "rehear" the case rather than "issue a new decision consistent with Bruen".
they can kick it up when they lose, absolutely. but then 1st Circuit has to deal with it again under Bruen decision where the rules are much clearer than say Heller, McDonald & Ceatano. These are the last gasps (Cheyne-Stokes breaths) of a dying body, so to say.The issue with this though is that even if we win at the district court level, MA is most certainly going to appeal the decision back up to CA1. They said as much during oral arguments earlier this week. So I see this as more of them just delaying the inevitable instead of not wanting to create binding precedent on the whole circuit. They know what decision Bruen forces them to make, they just want to avoid having to make that decision as long as possible.
They could’ve dealt with it now under Bruen, they didn’t need to remand the case back down. This is just a stall tactic.they can kick it up when they lose, absolutely. but then 1st Circuit has to deal with it again under Bruen decision where the rules are much clearer than say Heller, McDonald & Ceatano. These are the last gasps (Cheyne-Stokes breaths) of a dying body, so to say.
Interesting the court was told to "rehear" the case rather than "issue a new decision consistent with Bruen".
I think they’re just buying time, hoping a favorable SCOTUS comes along somehow, magically in the next few years. I hope I’m wrong though and it’s buh bye roster.One of the interesting remarks I remember from the CA1 hearing was when the matter was brought up to rehear it, the lawyer said well we're just going to say the same things all over again I don't see why. They basically are giving MA another bite at the apple by finding history, text and tradition and if I know the MA liberals they'll be pouring 19th century slavery laws all over it, even though this was never a slave state. The best part now is I can shove it down their throats on Twitter if they do try it and they can't block me.
in the next few years. I hope I’m wrong though and it’s buh bye roster
... in the next few years.No more 1200 dollar Glocks!
They weren't clear enough to be understood the Circuit Judges (though plenty clear to you and I) and I believeThomas said Heller wasn't clear enough and the majority should've gone farther like they did in Bruen.They could’ve dealt with it now under Bruen, they didn’t need to remand the case back down. This is just a stall tactic.
ETA: Also, Heller, McDonald & Caetano were plenty clear. It’s just that the inferior anti-2A courts were willfully misrepresenting those decisions to uphold their anti-gun agendas, and Bruen was SCOTUS’ way of trying to nip that in the bud. Unfortunately the truth is that where there’s a will, there’s a way. We’re still seeing bad court decisions in various circuits post-Bruen.
The real issue is that SCOTUS didn’t put their foot down after Heller and basically allowed the appellate courts to go nuts for the better part of a decade. However, we’re already seeing signs that SCOTUS has learned from their past mistakes and are going to be more proactive and not let the inferior courts go wild again.
That’s also being challenged in this litigation. If we win this case, both of those lists get tossed.I am late to this party, if the roster gets struck down. What impact will it have on the secret AG list that is under consumer protection?
Seeing shit like that in the Classifieds section is pretty wild. I have to admit to chuckling at those prices.No more 1200 dollar Glocks!
Expect at least another 6 months to a year of litigation at the district court level before we get a decision there. It’s then gonna get appealed back up to CA1 so we’re still a long ways away before this is all wrapped up.Any idea when this gets heard at the district level.
Since 1/1/2020, PR is "shall issue". Licensing is required to own a handgun, but that same license allows you to carry. No open carry, though.Does Puerto Rico even allow people to buy guns?
Hope I live long enough to see it. Courts move way to slowly.It may take a while, but the roster will be dead.
Yep, same here. I've got one foot in the grave already and my extensive team of doctors seem to want to put my other foot in there too.Hope I live long enough to see it. Courts move way too slowly.
I think they’re just buying time, hoping a favorable SCOTUS comes along somehow, magically in the next few years. I hope I’m wrong though and it’s buh bye roster.