What Will SCOTUS Do

[SgtToadette 59]

I did too...but it all depends on when you went.

"If it was when I went, it was good. If it was after I went, it's bad." -Everybody

[SJG 253]

We would have a better chance if NJ did not permit any form of carry and you can bet the dems would vote for that. Perhaps its time to reverse our position to achieve the desired end?

[intercooler 41]

it's over. it will only get worse from here on out. It's time to start leaving NJ, the ship is too far gone...

[Zeke 5,504]

 

not gonna bother...believe your NJEA education or whatever brand of education you have.[/quote

Cool

[illy 1]

"If it was when I went, it was good. If it was after I went, it's bad." -Everybody

I approve of this message.

[mipafox 438]

"If it was when I went, it was good. If it was after I went, it's bad." -Everybody

Well, it wasn't my assertion. But I have a friend who is a school teacher in NJ. And I can tell you this. They are taught all of the problems in the world are because of America. And America is the most unfair nation on the planet because the government is too restrained and people are "left to their own devices."

 

I was never taught that.

 

Among the things they no longer teach - Communist and Socialist governments murdered more people during the 20th Century than all people murdered by anyone for any reason, plus all people killed in all wars, combined, in the 2 million year history of mankind.

 

And they will top it this century by a factor of 10. Several billion people will be murdered by Socialists and Communists in the 21st Century.

[ryan_j 0]

it's over. it will only get worse from here on out. It's time to start leaving NJ, the ship is too far gone...

 

And go where? 

[SgtToadette 59]

Well, it wasn't my assertion. But I have a friend who is a school teacher in NJ. And I can tell you this. They are taught all of the problems in the world are because of America. And America is the most unfair nation on the planet because the government is too restrained and people are "left to their own devices."

 

I was never taught that.

 

Among the things they no longer teach - Communist and Socialist governments murdered more people during the 20th Century than all people murdered by anyone for any reason, plus all people killed in all wars, combined, in the 2 million year history of mankind.

 

And they will top it this century by a factor of 10. Several billion people will be murdered by Socialists and Communists in the 21st Century.

 

I've already discussed this topic in depth.

[Gus 33]

I am not surprised, but extremely disappointed in the outcome today. Being from NJ told me to not get my hopes up, but being an American told me that anything is possible and justice will prevail.

 

I just lost my faith in truth, justice, and the American way.  

[Jfoster99 80]

 

I just lost my faith in truth, justice, and the American way.

 

I feel like the constitution just Died... Might I suggest we fly our flags at half mast in its honor...

 

 

[Gus 33]

I feel like the constitution just Died... Might I suggest we fly our flags at half mast in its honor...

 

I like that. I'm flying it at half tomorrow.

[DeerSlayer 241]

I feel like the constitution just Died... Might I suggest we fly our flags at half mast in its honor...

I like the idea also Jeff. I think I'll fly mine upside down tomorrow. I believe thats a sign of distress. & the people of NJ are certainly in distress, with the current leadership that represent us.

 

http://www.jeffhead.com/liberty/flagdistress.htm

 

The only problem I see is who is coming to our rescue?

 

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

That SCOTUS would just dismiss this whole thing because they feel it is not worth their attention is indeed deflating.  

 

How about a sign like this for our highways:

 

"Welcome to New Jersey!  Abandon hope, all ye who enter here."

[Vlad G 345]

That SCOTUS would just dismiss this whole thing because they feel it is not worth their attention is indeed deflating.  

 

 

Don't assume you know WHY they didn't get involved. The attention one I don't buy, but cause they heard it 3 times in conference. it could be they had 4 votes but not 5. It could be that they are waiting for Peruta. It could be as simple as the entire term is busy with things they consider more important. It could be 1000 different things.

 

To me, the split circuit thing tells me they'll handle it eventually, unless the 9th overrides it enbank. They'll have no choice, but in reality I don't think we actually have a circuit split right this second because unless I'm mistake the 9th case is stayed pending a decision of enbank.

[NJPatriot 0]

That SCOTUS would just dismiss this whole thing because they feel it is not worth their attention is indeed deflating.  

 

How about a sign like this for our highways:

 

"Welcome to New Jersey!  Abandon hope, all ye who enter here."

I think a campaign to embarass SCOTUS for their cowardly and politically correct dereliction of duty is warranted

[Vlad G 345]

I think a campaign to embarass SCOTUS for their cowardly and politically correct dereliction of duty is warranted

 

Sorry, but that is nonsense. They don't care about what you think of them. Even if the did "shaming" them won't make them your friend or any more likely to rule in your favor.

 

The answer is (as it has always been) change the people in power, and I don't mean replace D with R, I mean replacing statist assholes of any stripe with people who actually believe in individual rights. That is always hard but the only course of action we really ever had.

[njpilot 671]

I like the idea also Jeff. I think I'll fly mine upside down tomorrow. I believe thats a sign of distress. & the people of NJ are certainly in distress, with the current leadership that represent us.

 

http://www.jeffhead.com/liberty/flagdistress.htm

 

The only problem I see is who is coming to our rescue?

I've used this avatar since Nov 2012 for the very reasons you state.

[Newtonian 453]

Good article on this topic: http://www.cato.org/node/51723

 

Was the Supreme Court serious about Heller? Also for the first time correctly explains that NJ gun laws are the worst in the nation.

[wooly bugger 1]

Don't assume you know WHY they didn't get involved. The attention one I don't buy, but cause they heard it 3 times in conference. it could be they had 4 votes but not 5. It could be that they are waiting for Peruta. It could be as simple as the entire term is busy with things they consider more important. It could be 1000 different things.

 

To me, the split circuit thing tells me they'll handle it eventually, unless the 9th overrides it enbank. They'll have no choice, but in reality I don't think we actually have a circuit split right this second because unless I'm mistake the 9th case is stayed pending a decision of enbank.

The 2 relistings make me think that there was a lot of horse trading and one side or another pulled support for cert when they realized the decision wasn't going to go their way, so better to keep it grey for now and maybe take up the question when the composition of the court is more favorable. This may have actually saved us an outright denial of right to carry, but whatever was behind it, it sickens me to think that our fundamental rights depend on such lowly politicking.

 

I don't see that how you come to the conclusion that they have no choice to hear it eventually. Even if Peruta is overridden en banc, there's still a split on an enumerated right that the court itself has determined is incorporated. That split isn't going away unless somehow the 7th circuit goes back and undoes Moore. How much clearer can it get? This is a case of politics overruling the court's fundamental duty. I have lost all respect.

[ryan_j 0]

Good article on this topic: http://www.cato.org/node/51723

 

Was the Supreme Court serious about Heller? Also for the first time correctly explains that NJ gun laws are the worst in the nation.

 

 

Spot on. Cato's amicus brief also asked if they were serious. Apparently not. 

[LorenzoS 100]

I think a campaign to embarass SCOTUS for their cowardly and politically correct dereliction of duty is warranted

 

I humbly suggest to everyone here that your energy is better spent making a plan to leave this state and following through on it, instead of tantrums or banging your heads against the wall.  This state is a lost cause and nobody here can save it.

 

I am out in one month.

[PDM 91]

It's hard to see how the issue would ever make it to the Supreme Court again.  Peruta and the DC case (whenever that is finally heard) are possibilities, but very slim ones.  Once those are denied cert (assuming that the state appeals to the Supreme Court if en bank rehearing of Peruta is denied or if Peruta is affirmed by the full 9th circuit) what's left?  Nothing.  The issue has already been fully litigated in the lower courts and any subsequent lawsuit would be dismissed under the doctrine of stare decisis.  It's over.  Done. Finished. 

[Newtonian 453]

Spot on. Cato's amicus brief also asked if they were serious. Apparently not. 

I think they're serious to the point of allowing gun ownership, hence Heller. That being said, does anyone know the practical impact of that ruling in DC? Now that they "have the right" to have a gun in their home, do they really have it or is this something that's still being fought tooth and nail and contested in courts? There isn't a single gun shop in the District. Can someone from DC go to Virginia, buy a gun and ammo, and take it home? Can they transport it outside of DC for practice?

 

Had they heard Drake and ruled unequivocally in our favor, we'd probably not get anything resembling what they have across the Delaware for a very, very long time, if ever. To its eternal credit Illinois did not appeal this to the Supreme Court, they just instituted a mechanism for CC. That was undoubtedly a consequence of the downstate rural influence. 

 

I'm not exaggerating (as I'm often prone to do) when I say that things would be VASTLY different here. The NJ legislature's stand would be "OK, you have concealed carry."

 

And you also have a two-year waiting period (as in NY State for new residents), and you must get five letters testifying to your character, including two from blood relatives and one from an employer (adopted individuals and the self-employed are screwed), you must undergo 400 hours of training at certified centers (which will take five years to establish, and the proprietors of which will be first-degree relatives of democrat legislators) at a cost of $5,000, and the permit will cost $900, renewable every four months. Etc., etc.

 

Each of these stipulations -- can you put any of them past Loretta Weinberg??? -- will take years of litigation to fight, with only a modest chance of winning on any of them.

 

Sadly, the right to keep and bear arms, except (to my knowledge) for Vermonth, has been nearly EXCLUSIVELY a result of legislative initiative and rarely (Peruta, Illinois) based on judicial decision. 

 

We've run out of judicial remedies, and even if one were to magically appear we'd still encounter the problems I just mentioned.

 

THE ONLY WAY TO GET REASONABLE GUN LAWS IS TO VOTE NJ DEMOCRATS OUT OF THE SENATE AND ASSEMBLY.

 

PERIOD.

 

It can be done. There are more than a few winnable seats, and very low voter turnout. 

 

Or we can wait for Peruta to reach the Supreme Court and engage in all the wishful nonsense all over again.

[Newtonian 453]

I humbly suggest to everyone here that your energy is better spent making a plan to leave this state and following through on it, instead of tantrums or banging your heads against the wall.  This state is a lost cause and nobody here can save it.

 

I am out in one month.

I 100% agree. And it's not just for guns. This state has always been a sewer of corruption and high taxes. 

[springfieldxds 0]

The 2 relistings make me think that there was a lot of horse trading and one side or another pulled support for cert when they realized the decision wasn't going to go their way, so better to keep it grey for now and maybe take up the question when the composition of the court is more favorable. This may have actually saved us an outright denial of right to carry, but whatever was behind it, it sickens me to think that our fundamental rights depend on such lowly politicking.

 

I don't see that how you come to the conclusion that they have no choice to hear it eventually. Even if Peruta is overridden en banc, there's still a split on an enumerated right that the court itself has determined is incorporated. That split isn't going away unless somehow the 7th circuit goes back and undoes Moore. How much clearer can it get? This is a case of politics overruling the court's fundamental duty. I have lost all respect.

technically speaking there is no split with the 3rd and 7th, the 7th dealt with an all out ban on carrying, there is a chance, a slim chance that if Illinois passed a law like ours the 7th could of found it constitutional

 

since we technically have a carry law in place that only acts as a defacto ban on carrying there is no true split between the 7th and 3rd  

 

the only hope we have for a true split right now is if the ninth allows Harris to intervene and denies her petition for en ban or if they deny Harris to intervene knowing Hawaii will ask for en ban, after it goes through the district court again, then deny their petition for en banc, basically as long as California and Hawaii are denied en banc we will have a true split 

 

there is always a slim chance that en banc is heard and reaffirms the courts opinion creating even a bigger split, but with the current make up of the 9th that is very unlikely to happen, so our best hope is to prey that the court fast tracks this case, denies en banc with the knowledge of knowing that Harris if allowed to intervene will 99% likely appeal to scotus with a true circuit split, and with that true split  in place with no where else to go but scotus, they will most likely have to hear the case

 

right now there is no true split, even with the 9th, as California doesnt have a deadline to comply with and also since its not done going through the appeals process

 

the way i see it is scotus is waiting to see how the 9th plays out, if the split stands theyll take the next case that comes along, if the split is reversed en banc theyll deny the case since there is no need for them to get involved then 

 

we need to prey that Harris is allowed to intervene, is then denied en banc, then she appeals to scotus with a true circuit split.  I believe this will happen as the whole 9th is probably sick and tired of these carrying cases and just wants scotus to handle it and at least give them some kind of method to use when the next one comes up so they dont have to keep making it up as they go along  

[wooly bugger 1]

technically speaking there is no split with the 3rd and 7th, the 7th dealt with an all out ban on carrying, there is a chance, a slim chance that if Illinois passed a law like ours the 7th could of found it constitutional

 

since we technically have a carry law in place that only acts as a defacto ban on carrying there is no true split between the 7th and 3rd  

 

the only hope we have for a true split right now is if the ninth allows Harris to intervene and denies her petition for en ban or if they deny Harris to intervene knowing Hawaii will ask for en ban, after it goes through the district court again, then deny their petition for en banc, basically as long as California and Hawaii are denied en banc we will have a true split 

 

there is always a slim chance that en banc is heard and reaffirms the courts opinion creating even a bigger split, but with the current make up of the 9th that is very unlikely to happen, so our best hope is to prey that the court fast tracks this case, denies en banc with the knowledge of knowing that Harris if allowed to intervene will 99% likely appeal to scotus with a true circuit split, and with that true split  in place with no where else to go but scotus, they will most likely have to hear the case

 

right now there is no true split, even with the 9th, as California doesnt have a deadline to comply with and also since its not done going through the appeals process

 

the way i see it is scotus is waiting to see how the 9th plays out, if the split stands theyll take the next case that comes along, if the split is reversed en banc theyll deny the case since there is no need for them to get involved then 

 

we need to prey that Harris is allowed to intervene, is then denied en banc, then she appeals to scotus with a true circuit split.  I believe this will happen as the whole 9th is probably sick and tired of these carrying cases and just wants scotus to handle it and at least give them some kind of method to use when the next one comes up so they dont have to keep making it up as they go along  

Thanks for the great post. The way you describe the non-split with 7CA makes a lot of sense, and it lends some method to SCOTUS's madness to see if a true split appears after en banc. It sounds to me like we have two options:

1) 9th denies en banc. Harris appeals to SCOTUS, and they will recognize a true split and hear it.

2) 9th grants en banc, most likely overturns, and leaves us without a split. We then either appeal the 9th decision and likely get denied cert again, or, perhaps more wisely, keep our powder dry and appeal it only if the court makeup changes in our favor. According to Newtonian, this will never happen on our relentless drive toward a full-fledged totalitarian state.

[Newtonian 453]

 According to Newtonian, this will never happen on our relentless drive toward a full-fledged totalitarian state.

This legal mumbo-jumbo puts me to sleep. Assuming the most wishful magic comes to pass, the only way we get CC is for the Supremes not only to rule favorably on an applicable case, but to set specific guidelines for states to implement its decision, which it will never do. Something along the lines of "...no funny business. Use a reasonable approximation of the laws from these [listed] states." NEVER HAPPEN. See my previous post on what NJ would do if forced. 

 

My original post on this subject, explaining the nature of this court's "conservative" wing, was dead on. They are not libertarians or even conservatives. They are authoritarian, big-government Republicans in the finest tradition. 

[CMJeepster 2,777]

"Get outta here! Poll says 41% of New Jerseyans would leave"  http://www.app.com/interactive/article/20140501/NJNEWS/305010083/NJ-gallup-poll?nclick_check=1

[quikz 34]

I humbly suggest to everyone here that your energy is better spent making a plan to leave this state and following through on it, instead of tantrums or banging your heads against the wall. This state is a lost cause and nobody here can save it.

 

I am out in one month.

[quikz 34]

^^^^^THIS^^^^^

 

 

See

 

You

 

Suckers...

 

Pls. No more apologists. We got SHAFTED.