• 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.

NSSF filed vs AGO!

Cliffs notes:


Conclusion
Federal courts have a “virtually unflagging obligation . . . to exercise the jurisdiction given them.” Colo. River, 424 U.S. at 817, 96 S.Ct. 1236. Attorney General Healy has not satisfied the heavy burden of demonstrating this case permits the Court to shirk that obligation. Accordingly, Defendant’s motion (Docket No. 67) is denied.
 
Noreaster said:
Any predictions on what is thrown on the wall next to see if it sticks?
Click to expand...


Who knows, but it appears that this judge (Court) recognizes the AG's motions as delay tactics as noted in the last sentence before the conclusion.

Therefore, if this Court were to stay litigation, it might only further delay litigation that has already lasted almost two and a half years.4
Click to expand...
 
Delay, delay, delay...that's all Healy is trying to do. She knows she can't win on the merits, so she's throwing every procedural roadblock she can at the case to make sure her enforcement notice remains in effect as long as possible.
 
mlaboss said:
Delay, delay, delay...that's all Healy is trying to do. She knows she can't win on the merits, so she's throwing every procedural roadblock she can at the case to make sure her enforcement notice remains in effect as long as possible.
Click to expand...

I'm going to laugh if this leads to the AG's 'Consumer Protection' powers being curtailed in general. It would be a real blow the AG's power and extortion ability. Sure would put a dent in campaign donations from all the car dealerships and whatnot that have been forking over money to be left alone since Luther ascended the throne.
 
I pray the entire thing gets thrown right in her face. We the people need some justice from this tyrant.
 
Update from NSSF:

Federal District Court Dismisses Mass. AG’s Motion to Stay

Firearms Retailers, NSSF Federal Suit Against ‘Enforcement Notice’ Goes Forward

NEWTOWN, Conn. — The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts today denied Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey’s attempt to stay a federal lawsuit brought by four federally-licensed Bay State firearms retailers and the National Shooting Sports Foundation ® (NSSF ®). The lawsuit states that Healey in her 2016 “Enforcement Notice” redefining “assault weapons” had overstepped her legal authority and deprived the retailers of their due process protections guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.

In 2018, a federal district court judge denied Healey’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit finding that the plaintiffs had asserted valid federal due process claims. In January 2019, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit dismissed Healey’s appeal of that decision, just hours after hearing oral argument.

The ruling today to deny a stay in this case, pending parallel litigation in a state court, is the third attempt by Attorney General Healey to stall a trial in federal court. “… the Enforcement Notice warrants constitutional review for vagueness without reaching the state law issue,” wrote District Judge Timothy S. Hillman. The parallel state court case filed by different retailers claims the enforcement notice is an invalid regulation that was improperly issued by the Attorney General in violation of the state’s administrative procedure act.

“The actions of Attorney General Healy in 2016 were unconstitutional, leaving firearms retailers in Massachusetts unable to determine the meaning or scope of the Enforcement Notice and subsequent explanations,” said NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel Lawrence Keane. “Because criminal penalties can result due to her unilateral reinterpretation of a state statute done without administrative process or input from affected parties, her office exceeded its lawful authority and retailers were deprived of their due process protections under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.”

The retailers are Pullman Arms Inc. of Worcester; Guns and Gear, LLC of Agawam; Paper City Firearms of Holyoke; and Grrr Gear of Orange.

Representing NSSF and the retailers are the Boston-based law firm of Kenney and Sams, P.C., and Michael Sullivan of the Ashcroft Law Firm, who is a former United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts and former Acting Director, U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

-30-

About NSSF
The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the trade association for the firearms industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of more than 12,000 manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen's organizations and publishers. For more information, log on to www.nssf.org .
 
Glockster30 said:
Who knows, but it appears that this judge (Court) recognizes the AG's motions as delay tactics as noted in the last sentence before the conclusion.
Click to expand...
I don't understand Healy's strategy here. It's never a good long-term strategy to piss a judge off with frivolous delay tactics in a case like this. And her approach has indeed been unusually frivolous.

It makes me wonder if she has her eye on some other office and is taking every opportunity to delay the outcome of this trial until after she gets it. But I don't know what office that would be; Markey and Warren aren't going anywhere and Baker is here till 2022. We'll have a ruling by then no matter what.
 
As in the manner fitting for Tim Donaghy, the disgraced nba official,

Maura tried to rig the game, betting she would be whisked away to a federal position in crooked failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton administration.

And leave the citizens of Massachusetts holding the bag of smelly oppression.
 
Boston4567 said:
I don't understand Healy's strategy here. It's never a good long-term strategy to piss a judge off with frivolous delay tactics in a case like this. And her approach has indeed been unusually frivolous.

It makes me wonder if she has her eye on some other office and is taking every opportunity to delay the outcome of this trial until after she gets it. But I don't know what office that would be; Markey and Warren aren't going anywhere and Baker is here till 2022. We'll have a ruling by then no matter what.
Click to expand...

If she wins, she wins. If she loses, it doesn't cost her anything. Even if she "loses", she still wins, because it makes ARs even more icky and evil, and it drives gun dealers out of business.

Hell, even if she loses, it'll be a reason for MA legislators to change the law, because "those NRA bought federal judges can't do the right thing."
 
Boston4567 said:
I don't understand Healy's strategy here. It's never a good long-term strategy to piss a judge off with frivolous delay tactics in a case like this. And her approach has indeed been unusually frivolous.

It makes me wonder if she has her eye on some other office and is taking every opportunity to delay the outcome of this trial until after she gets it. But I don't know what office that would be; Markey and Warren aren't going anywhere and Baker is here till 2022. We'll have a ruling by then no matter what.
Click to expand...

Spite. The Enforcement Notice was designed to get attention on her so when Clinton became President she'd be considered for US Attorney General. Since those hopes were dashed, she's just drawing this case out as long as possible so as more dealers will be driven out of business due to reduced sales.
 
Boston4567 said:
I don't understand Healy's strategy here. It's never a good long-term strategy to piss a judge off with frivolous delay tactics in a case like this. And her approach has indeed been unusually frivolous.

It makes me wonder if she has her eye on some other office and is taking every opportunity to delay the outcome of this trial until after she gets it. But I don't know what office that would be; Markey and Warren aren't going anywhere and Baker is here till 2022. We'll have a ruling by then no matter what.
Click to expand...

IANAL

Number one goal is to simply wear out the plaintiffs. Most civil defendants prefer to play the attrition strategy. Insurance companies, anti-trust cases, civil rights suits. Using time to make the plaintiff go away is a win. Normally, this would also benefit a big law firm at the expense and irritation of the client (assuming the client doesn't already know how to play the game) because firms bill hourly by six-minute increments. But here, there's no bill for the AG to pay, so they don't have to worry about their counsel racking up the billables.

Second, the suit isn't past summary judgment stage yet. Summary judgment is in between the motion to dismiss and the trial. Something like 2% of civil cases actually get to trial. Presumably, the AG is going to try to win at summary judgment. Summary judgment means there's no dispute of facts in the case worthy of going to trial. This is a big hurdle for civil plaintiffs.

Third, litigation is "war." You pull out all the stops in order to win.
 
Is there any chance that she “moderates” her Enforcement Notice in order to avoid trial, and maybe more importantly, discovery? I’ve heard that the State of New York was considering something similar now that their handgun transport ban is going to the Supreme Court . . .
 
Please god let us win this one.
The economy will see a huge boom if we are able to purchase new now banned rifles.
I know I have a couple I dream of owning
 
This would just strike down her enforcement, right? Not the AWB or mag restrictions? I'm all for any small step but the laws before her decree made AR's not worth the effort or are neutered ones really that popular?
 
If she loses I do think Deleo will cash some big checks from the Cabal and make sure a new AWB is passed in short order which bans everything including 10/22s in scary furniture.

Those chardonnay sipping country club bigots can't stand the unwashed unworthy peasants having firepower.
 

Similar threads

Cheap vs Expensive Red Dots
Replies
8
Views
476
johngalt2
J
Holosun 510 vs Holosun AMES
Replies
6
Views
217
PappyM3
PappyM3
What the Sheriffs were told three days ago by the FBI.
2
Replies
51
Views
3K
ridleyman
R
For those who question the strength of M2A1 vs M2A2 ammo cans, here's an interesting article on the subject.
Replies
12
Views
372
Uzi2
U
Over-gassed vs Under-gassed
Replies
16
Views
416
fishhawk357
fishhawk357
Back
Top Bottom