Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Kolbe V. Hogan original decision SHREDDED

  1. #1
    Regular Member DeSchaine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Kalamazoo, MI
    Posts
    604

    Kolbe V. Hogan original decision SHREDDED

    The US Fourth Circuit tore apart the original decision in Kolbe V. Hogan, and basically said Marylands Firearm Safety Act unconstitutional. This is a thing of beauty and will no doubt attempt to go to SCOTUS. This has huge repercussions for all of these idiotic "ten round mag" laws and other similarly moronic excuses for banning firearms.


    PDF Link:
    http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/...an_Opinion.pdf

    Edit: That is one long and awesome list of Amici Supporting Appellants.
    Last edited by DeSchaine; 02-11-2016 at 05:34 PM.
    Guard with jealous attention the public liberty.
    Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel.
    Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force.
    Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.
    -Patrick Henry, Virginia Ratification Convention, June 5, 1788

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Saint Louis
    Posts
    97
    Quote Originally Posted by DeSchaine View Post
    The US Fourth Circuit ... basically said Marylands Firearm Safety Act unconstitutional.
    Except that they explicitly stated that was not the judgement:
    "This is not a finding that Maryland’s law is unconstitutional. It is simply a ruling that the test of its constitutionality is different from that used by the district court."

    They provide several very good key findings that will be used against the act as it gets reheard in the district court, and it appears that it will get overturned, but this ruling simply sends it back to the district court with the instruction to apply strict scrutiny under the scope of the 2ndA. The state now gets their opportunity to demonstrate strict scrutiny that wasn't applied originally and a new decision will be issued after that rehearing by the district court (and presumably re-appealed to the US Fourth Circuit).
    Last edited by STLDaniel; 02-12-2016 at 12:02 AM.

  3. #3
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,603
    http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/...an_Opinion.pdf

    Long 90 page read; however, IMO can be reduced to "affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded by published opinion."

    I don't see any shredding - only a uphill climb over an extensive time.

    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northwest Kent County, Michigan
    Posts
    757
    My observation of the rabid anti-gun mindset of certain liberal judges, leads me to believe that not even strict scrutiny will be much of a legal barrier to so-called 'common-sense' gun safety laws.

    Believe me, an activist judge will find any evidence, no matter how scant, sufficient to overcome strict scrutiny. Just my humble opinion. Still, this decision is a good precedent. But I think that the litigation over the Second Amendment is far far from over.

    After all, how much time has ANY federal court spent on the phrase "shall not be infringed"?
    Last edited by OC4me; 02-12-2016 at 10:31 PM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member DeSchaine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Kalamazoo, MI
    Posts
    604
    Yes, it was a long read, especially for nothing more than a directive for the lower court to take a tougher look at the situation. But at the end of it all, it certainly seems that the judges authoring the opinion would be in favor of removing a good chunk of the FSA should they actually be forced to that point. It also seems that by doing it this way, the entire appeals court system is TRYING to keep it from going to SCOTUS, but I'm fairly sure it's going to end up there anyways.
    Guard with jealous attention the public liberty.
    Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel.
    Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force.
    Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.
    -Patrick Henry, Virginia Ratification Convention, June 5, 1788

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by DeSchaine View Post
    This is a thing of beauty...
    Hardly. Far, far too long.

    I have no problem with a judge or judges thoroughly substantiating their decision, as that forms the basis for sound case law. It would be nice, however, if they were to summarize their finding in an Executive Summary like the rest of the world.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    391
    With the death of Scalia the appellate courts want their cases to go to SCOTUS as fast as possible. Since all of them are anti-gun rulings (or will be once CA4 takes Kolbe en banc to overturn it like CA9 did with Peruta) a tie at SCOTUS is as good as a win for them. Either way the anti-gun ruling stands.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •