• 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.

FPC files motion in first circuit to vacate and remand thier lawsuit challenging the Massachusetts approved roster

What is interesting here is that in the CA case referenced, defendant, The state of CA, wants the case remanded back to district court as a stall tactic. Wonder why the FPC doesn't want the circuit court to rule on the case?
 
Last edited:
Even if they win against the Rooster what do they do about the AG 'Consumer Safety BS'. I would have thought they would have gone for that first. The Rooster could be challenged as restraint of free trade.
 
Knob Creek said:
Even if they win against the Rooster what do they do about the AG 'Consumer Safety BS'. I would have thought they would have gone for that first. The Rooster could be challenged as restraint of free trade.
Click to expand...
It's probably easier to say "These two SKUs differ only by the color of the slide; why is only one accepted?" We've already seen that "The AG has provided no guidance to allow EOPSS-accepted firearms to meet their requirements" is a hard hill to climb.

Also, defeating the printed roster defeats the AG at the same time. The inverse is not true.
 
Mesatchornug said:
It's probably easier to say "These two SKUs differ only by the color of the slide; why is only one accepted?" We've already seen that "The AG has provided no guidance to allow EOPSS-accepted firearms to meet their requirements" is a hard hill to climb.

Also, defeating the printed roster defeats the AG at the same time. The inverse is not true.
Click to expand...
Except Glocks are OK on Rooster but not with AG. Just an example.
 
Knob Creek said:
Except Glocks are OK on Rooster but not with AG. Just an example.
Click to expand...
I agree. But we already fought that case and lost for arbitrary reasons of "because guns."

With the EOPSS list, they can easily point to mechanically identical products that are only different by color, for example. Fighting that seems easier from a factual basis...at least to me. It seems especially strong under text and history.

Meanwhile, if the EOPSS list goes away, there's no way the AG "list" stays. The reverse isn't necessarily true. For one this seems appropriate to take the bigger bite.
 
I worry that the “gun safety“ fig leaf may provide them enough legal cover. You and I know that the point of the roster is to reduce the supply of guns and make them more expensive. It is simply harassment of the industry and legal gun owners. But it is wrapped in the fig leaf of “it‘s for the children”.
 
Awesome. Would be great to see Herr Healey get a dose of humility just before the election….although it’s not likely to happen.
 
M1911 said:
I worry that the “gun safety“ fig leaf may provide them enough legal cover. You and I know that the point of the roster is to reduce the supply of guns and make them more expensive. It is simply harassment of the industry and legal gun owners. But it is wrapped in the fig leaf of “it‘s for the children”.
Click to expand...
Possibly. Post-Bruen, I think we have more room to demand quantitative bases, though. E.G, "Define: loaded chamber indicator."
 
xjma99 said:
Yeah I’m still in the dark here, appreciate the effort.
Click to expand...
The FPC tried to sue the state to remove the roster. The AG successfully had the case closed dismissed because they claimed there was no demonstration of harm. The FPC attempted started to appeal that decision.

Then Bruen happened.

Now, they're requesting the state be forced to reconsider based on the new "Text, History, and Tradition" test, rather than the previous, two-step.

(Edit: better word use)
 
Last edited:
bigbravehog said:
FPC are one of the few orgs I actually throw extra money at. I wonder what our chances are with the 1st circuit
Click to expand...
Slim? But it'll get B-slapped at some point when the dominos start falling in CA and NY. 1st Circuit will look stupid in comparison and get irrelevantized. At some point, other judges will pull them aside and say, "You aren't here to prove a point, but to follow the ruling. Knock it the F off." As looney as they are, I believe they will eventually capitulate on that concept alone.

Knob Creek said:
Even if they win against the Rooster what do they do about the AG 'Consumer Safety BS'. I would have thought they would have gone for that first. The Rooster could be challenged as restraint of free trade.
Click to expand...

I think that falls pretty quickly after. Hell, maybe a judge makes side-mention of hte stupid Healey Rule in the ruling and shuts it all down in one felled swoop, a la C-Tom.
 

Similar threads

This must be on the approved roster…
Replies
5
Views
466
CATI
CATI
ATF Receiver Rule - FPC Granted Cert
Replies
9
Views
477
pastera
pastera
Smart gun will put fingerprint, facial recognition technology to work: Biofire has called it the 'first and only biometric firearm on the market'
2
Replies
40
Views
579
42!
42!
APPROVED FIREARMS ROSTER 12/2023 Staccato C2
2 3
Replies
70
Views
3K
Jeffaah
J
3rd Circuit Denies Rehearing In SAF Pennsylvania Gun Rights Victory
Replies
1
Views
142
oldguy68
oldguy68
Back
Top Bottom