Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 41

Thread: DC carry law ruled "probably unconstitutional PI issued

  1. #1
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984

    DC carry law ruled "probably unconstitutional PI issued

    Last edited by swinokur; 05-17-2016 at 02:23 PM.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    http://freebeacon.com/issues/federal...onstitutional/


    “This conclusion should not be read to suggest that it would be inappropriate for the District of Columbia to enact a licensing mechanism that includes appropriate time, place and manner restrictions on the carrying of handguns in public,” Judge Scullin said in his ruling. “The District of Columbia’s arbitrary ‘good reason’/’proper reason’ requirement, however, goes far beyond establishing such reasonable restrictions.”



    A lizard judge clearly,,,,

  3. #3
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984
    Dave you do know that is from last year right?

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by swinokur View Post
    Dave you do know that is from last year right?
    They gave DC some time before it became "final" I think ... so this is the update...

    Always useful to ID a lizard again....ie scullin ... judge who hates America !

  5. #5
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by swinokur View Post
    Thanks for the link .. at least this judge noted "constitutional right" v. just "right" ....

    My opinion would have been 1 sentence:

    "All regulations relating to the natural RKBA are void"

  7. #7
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984
    I'm sure DC will run to the Circuit and ask for a stay. it's in their DNA.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    97
    Swinokur,

    Thanks for giving us the updates. With the PI granted, does DC have to grant permits until the stay is granted? (And it will be granted, to be sure, just as you have stated it is in their DNA.)

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    519
    Just to clarify:

    The case Wrenn - v - DC was heard last year by judge Scullin. DC lost at trial and on appeal, made the argument that judge Scullin was improperly assigned to the case and his ruling was invalid. The appeals court agreed and remanded the case back to the lower court to be heard by another judge. The new judge, Clinton appointee judge Kollar-Kotelly, declined to hear oral arguments and refused to issue a preliminary injunction.

    The case today, Matthew Grace and Pink Pistols - v - DC and police chief Kathy Lanier, was filed December 22, 2015 and is being heard by GW Bush appointed judge Richard J. Leon. Today, judge Leon issued a preliminary injunction enjoining DC from enforcing their "good reason" requirement to obtain a concealed carry permit. Judge Leon stated in his opinion that DC was unlikely to prevail at trial, as the "good reason" restriction is likely unconstitutional.

    Washington Post article on the case here:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...html?tid=sm_tw

    The judge's rulliing here:
    http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/doc...gun-case/1996/

    DC will no doubt appeal and seek a stay from the appeals court.

  10. #10
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,732
    A preliminary injunction is not a final appealable order.
    Last edited by color of law; 05-17-2016 at 06:10 PM.

  11. #11
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984
    Spoke to an appellate attorney. He said:

    No, that's not true. A PI is immediately appealable. See 28 U.S.C. 1291(a)(1). Done all the time.
    Last edited by swinokur; 05-17-2016 at 07:46 PM.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    06076
    Posts
    66
    If the "good reason" clause is struck down at some point, would this also extend to places like NYC which are essentially GFZs?

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by adk_mechetech View Post
    If the "good reason" clause is struck down at some point, would this also extend to places like NYC which are essentially GFZs?
    NY is 2nd dist....so no.

    Either a 2nd dist. case would be needed or SCOTUS ...

    And 2nd dist judges are all lizards ...
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 05-17-2016 at 09:06 PM.

  14. #14
    Regular Member California Right To Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    463
    Quote Originally Posted by color of law View Post
    A preliminary injunction is not a final appealable order.
    A preliminary injunction is not final but it is certainly appealable all the way up to the US Supreme Court.
    Concealed carry is of no use to me, I don't carry a purse.

    Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry
    http://CaliforniaRightToCarry.org

  15. #15
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,732
    Quote Originally Posted by swinokur View Post
    Spoke to an appellate attorney. He said:
    No, that's not true. A PI is immediately appealable. See 28 U.S.C. 1291(a)(1). Done all the time.
    Try 1292 not 1291. Interlocutory Appeals are considered extraordinary and are frowned upon. Yes they are done all the time, but most are denied or the petitioner losses.

    Even if DC appeals I bet they loose.

  16. #16
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984
    only stating what an appellant attorney who has practiced in front of SCOTUS told me.

    but it is appealable.
    Last edited by swinokur; 05-18-2016 at 11:05 AM.

  17. #17
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984
    Here is the actual order..
    .

  18. #18
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984

  19. #19
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Federal enclave...not much use to the great unwashed masses.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  20. #20
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,732
    Quote Originally Posted by swinokur View Post
    Here is the actual order...
    From the Order:
    ORDERED that defendants shall modify and reissue, forthwith, all District of Columbia concealed carry license application materials to be consistent with this Order and the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, and it is further ORDERED that plaintiffs' Motion for a Permanent Injunction [Dkt. #6] is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and it is further ORDERED that plaintiffs Motion to Consolidate the Preliminary Injunction Proceedings with the Determination on the Merits [Dkt. #37] is DENIED.
    It appears this order is a final appealable order.

  21. #21
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984
    Effective today, MPDC is now accepting applications without "good reason". They are even waiving fees for people previously denied. I fully expect them to rescinded this when and if a stay is sought and granted. I am guessing this is window dressing to avoid a contempt citation.

    But for now, no good reason required.
    Last edited by swinokur; 05-19-2016 at 01:12 PM.

  22. #22
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,732
    They have 60 days to appeal. Granting the preliminary injunction and dismissing the permanent injunction without prejudice leaves me wondering. I don't think DC has a chance of winning and I think they know that. Was there a back room deal?

  23. #23
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984
    Several guys I know have gone down to MPDC HQ to reapply. No prints no fee but they were told DC will take the full 90 days to process. This gives them ample time to appeal to the Circuit, get a stay and hold or reject the applications again.

    Meet the new boss same as the old boss.

  24. #24
    Activist Member swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    984
    DC requested stay from Judge Leon. on the 19th Not unexpected.

  25. #25
    Regular Member hammer6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,169
    is there reciprocity now?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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