SCOTUS to hold closed door conference on NJ gun law case

[orangesolo 26]

"On January 25, 2017, the clerk for the Supreme Court of the United States informed Stephens that the Justices are set to hold a closed conference regarding his petition."

 

We shall see what happens!

[Zeke 5,504]

That's for cert

[maintenanceguy 510]

In case anyone else was confused...as I was:  I found this

 

http://www.englewoodnjnews.com/supreme-court-justices-set-to-hold-conference-regarding-2nd-amendment-case-stephens-vs-jerejian

[orangesolo 26]

In case anyone else was confused...as I was:  I found this

 

http://www.englewoodnjnews.com/supreme-court-justices-set-to-hold-conference-regarding-2nd-amendment-case-stephens-vs-jerejian

 

 

O.. completely forgot to include the link, my bad!

[orangesolo 26]

That's for cert

Yeah but if it's approved, scotus will look into the lower courts decisions. With a Pro-2A court, and trump choosing and swearing in probably within the next two weeks, this could make a difference in our laws and other state laws. Gotta wait until 02/10 to check if they decide to review the lower courts or not hear and it all be thrown out.

[Zeke 5,504]

Grant / no grant certori is SOP

[Zeke 5,504]

Yeah but if it's approved, scotus will look into the lower courts decisions. With a Pro-2A court, and trump choosing and swearing in probably within the next two weeks, this could make a difference in our laws and other state laws. Gotta wait until 02/10 to check if they decide to review the lower courts or not hear and it all be thrown out.

Justice ain't gonna be sworn in for 6 mos min

[GRIZ 3,369]

Justice ain't gonna be sworn in for 6 mos min

Not so. The longest it has taken for the Senate to vote on a SCOTUS appointee is 125 days. That was a Woodrow Wilson pick and he was appointed. The average time between a nominee being selected and appointment, rejection, or withdrawal is 25 days. Looking at a list of times in recent years the median appears to be in the range of 60-90 days (I didn't do all the math). There have been nominees confirmed within a few days. There has even been nominees confirmed the same day they were nominated.

 

I realize the Democrats are dragging out confirmation hearings for Trump appointees. This will get old quick. They will need a favor from the POTUS and the Republicans.

 

At 60 to 90 days from nomination to approval a Trump appointee can wind up being involved in this case.

[Zeke 5,504]

Griz. This is their last bastion.

Jus cause it was, doesn't mean it will not be worse.

Jus sayen

[Zeke 5,504]

I'm not sure what blue book some of you are placing your bets by. It's as good as toilet paper at this point.

[TR20 47]

Not so. The longest it has taken for the Senate to vote on a SCOTUS appointee is 125 days. That was a Woodrow Wilson pick and he was appointed. The average time between a nominee being selected and appointment, rejection, or withdrawal is 25 days. Looking at a list of times in recent years the median appears to be in the range of 60-90 days (I didn't do all the math). There have been nominees confirmed within a few days. There has even been nominees confirmed the same day they were nominated.

 

I realize the Democrats are dragging out confirmation hearings for Trump appointees. This will get old quick. They will need a favor from the POTUS and the Republicans.

 

At 60 to 90 days from nomination to approval a Trump appointee can wind up being involved in this case.

 

If the Dems try to block the confirmation of the next judge, Trump will tell McConnell to use the nuclear option (50 vote majority vs 60). 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/28/mcconnell-refuses-to-say-whether-nuclear-option-in-supreme-court-nomination-is-on-table.html

 

Regardless, there will be no 9th justice sitting on the court if the case itself (not the cert) is heard in early February.  Its a crying shame this case came up so fast!!

[diamondd817 827]

So let me get this straight. We have a case challenging NJ gun laws at the doorstep of SCOTUS, that could possibly restore our right to carry, and it has no support or backing from the gang over at ANJRPC? Shocker.

[capt14k 2,052]

Does anyone have any idea what he is saying? Blue Book?

 

Either way SCOTUS is going on a year without a 9th Justice. I don't think Dems will try and drag it out and further turn public opinion against them. Plus there is nothing stopping the GOP from using Nuclear Option to confirm Justice. I'm going with 60 days tops. If Cert is granted (only takes 4) 9 will hear the case and 5 will rule for the Second Amendment. This could be big depending how the majority opinion is written.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[68chris 20]

we will have our new justice on the bench before february is out

[TR20 47]

we will have our new justice on the bench before february is out

I tend to agree, by the end of February. 

[Gunnz 49]

Schumer wants to block any trump pick like the republicans did to Obama's pick.

If the senate votes on party lines, they can block any SCOTUS nominee.

When the DEMS changed the confirmation process in 2013 they had it 51 for cabinet picks and 60 for Supreme Court.

[Gunnz 49]

not sure they will use the nuclear option

Does anyone have any idea what he is saying? Blue Book?

 

Either way SCOTUS is going on a year without a 9th Justice. I don't think Dems will try and drag it out and further turn public opinion against them. Plus there is nothing stopping the GOP from using Nuclear Option to confirm Justice. I'm going with 60 days tops. If Cert is granted (only takes 4) 9 will hear the case and 5 will rule for the Second Amendment. This could be big depending how the majority opinion is written.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[Jim Hartman 31]

I tend to agree, by the end of February. 

 

I also agree. The Republicans will do the nuclear option if they have to.

[capt14k 2,052]

not sure they will use the nuclear option

 

I hope they don't. I think there are enough Dems (9) up for re-election in 2 years, in Pro-2A states that Trump won, who barely won themselves 4 years ago. However if they don't break party lines and Dems try and block confirmation; I think the GOP will use the nuclear option. Just like the Dems changed the rules to use it; so can the GOP. 60 vote is a Senate rule not a Constitutional Requirement.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[The brew guy 22]

Not so. The longest it has taken for the Senate to vote on a SCOTUS appointee is 125 days.

No longer accurate. If it were, there wouldn't be an open seat. The Dems will look at any appointments the same way that the Reps looked at Merrick Garland. Even assuming the use of the nuclear option, there are enough Reps who don't like trump that it still isn't a slam dunk. If I were a betting man, I wouldn't be betting on this, just too many different ways it could play out.

[Zeke 5,504]

^^^ this

Scalia' seat has been vacant almost a full year. As you'll recall Obama did nominate a replacement.....

 

Trump's cabinet is 4yrs min. Justice of SCOTUS is life. If the past weeks have enlightened the fact the left is doubling down on stupid. There is zero indication that a justice appointment will go smoothly. In fact, I feel it will be quite the opposite.

 

6 mos may be slightly dramatic on my part, but I see no pathway for February as many of you feel.

 

Add to this Ryan is discussing the 200 day plan.

[Newtonian 453]

I get the feeling that the country is getting sick of the bullshit from the left, and that somehow the democrats will realize that fucking with Trump's court appointee could be dangerous, especially to the political lives of democratic senators from states like NM, NH, CO, DE, IN, ME, MI, MO, NV, ND, PA, VA, WV.

 

That's like 14-15 senators. 

 

That's why I foresee an extremely acrimonious couple of weeks thanks to the likes of Chuck Shitmer followed by the senate rapidly falling in line.

 

Trump's first days have been magical, almost like the waters parting before him. Just read today that border patrols are ignoring the court order and keeping deplorables out. 

[NJHoosier 11]

So let me get this straight. We have a case challenging NJ gun laws at the doorstep of SCOTUS, that could possibly restore our right to carry, and it has no support or backing from the gang over at ANJRPC? Shocker.

 

In addition, can anyone confirm the veracity of this site? I don't want to get my hopes up over a fake news site.

[Michael2013 56]

Schumer wants to block any trump pick like the republicans did to Obama's pick.

If the senate votes on party lines, they can block any SCOTUS nominee.

When the DEMS changed the confirmation process in 2013 they had it 51 for cabinet picks and 60 for Supreme Court.

 

Schumer wants - but he can't.  Republicans were in majority, Schumer is not.

60 for the Supreme court is true.  If the Reps have guts, they can change that rule as well.

[capt14k 2,052]

The 9th Justice doesn't need to be seated by February. That is when the Cert meeting is. Case won't be heard til later. The 4 current Pro-2A Justices is enough to have Cert granted.

 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[Fred2 367]

I have been reading up on this one. And, if it gets in, NJ's laws will be gutted.

The case goes straight to the heart of Justifiable need, and needing a permit for a constitutional right.

 

https://reloadone.com/us-firearm-permit-and-licensing-laws-are-facially-unconstitutional/

[Zeke 5,504]

I have been reading up on this one. And, if it gets in, NJ's laws will be gutted.

The case goes straight to the heart of Justifiable need, and needing a permit for a constitutional right.

 

https://reloadone.com/us-firearm-permit-and-licensing-laws-are-facially-unconstitutional/

If the Court of current sees it our way. If not, um.....much travesty

[Indianajonze 379]

If the Court of current sees it our way. If not, um.....much travesty

 

^^this. if the court decides as it should that permitting laws are unconstitutional then it will be the dawn of a new era. if not however, it's going to be very dark days for nj. they'll be emboldened to go further. 

 

having said that, there's no way this permitting scheme is legal. basically, as i read it, guns are outlawed in this state unless you have written permission from the state. say what? how it got to this point in the first place is what i don't understand. where was the nra when this shit was first passed?

[Fred2 367]

As noted in the SAPPA RICO case, NJ is conspiring against us.

The reason it went on so long, as it is VERY expensive to fight.

 

Few people have the $ or legal expertise to make a case go as far as these have.

[pjd832 146]

^^this. if the court decides as it should that permitting laws are unconstitutional then it will be the dawn of a new era. if not however, it's going to be very dark days for nj. they'll be emboldened to go further. 

 

having said that, there's no way this permitting scheme is legal. basically, as i read it, guns are outlawed in this state unless you have written permission from the state. say what? how it got to this point in the first place is what i don't understand. where was the nra when this shit was first passed?

 

calling up/sending mail(since it was pre email) hustling money from folks then building their empire/museums etc and touting "their hard fought wins for gun owners rights"....which is always in gun friendly states and the one place that was off limits...but acting like it was some major battle like gotten open carry in nyc.....