DirtyDigz 1,812 Posted January 29, 2018 Appeal filing just released by Mark Cheeseman (PDF Attached at bottom of this post). Cheeseman: Quote In light of recent events we feel it is appropriate to release or argument against the state of NJ. The Brief was written by Jay Factor,who i believe presents specific arguments never before brought against the state. I thank Jay for his years of research and time he has put in on this brief. Myself and John Ray Sr. have appealed our denials from Dec13 2017 to the NJ appeals court. A few things you need to understand when you read this. #1 We are not attacking the statute. We are attacking the code. and the Siccardi rule. Urgent need, specific threats ect. #2 The code and Siccardi rule are decided on a case by case basis. Heller tells us Chief and Judges no longer can do this. #3 Our Argument proves that a NJ carry permit 2C:58-4s justifiable need requirement is the same thing as Hellers lawfull purpose. From the appeal: Quote MAIN ARGUMENT: HELLER PAGE 2821 NO LONGER PERMITS CASE-BY-CASE DETERMINATIONS. Quote UNDER THE SICCARDI RULE AND NJAC 13:54-2.4d-1, THE STATE DECIDES 2C:58-4 PERMITS ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS. Quote 3. HISTORICAL PROOF: THE “CORE SUBSTANATIVE STANDARD” OF NEW JERSEY’S HANDGUN CARRY PERMITING SYSTEM WAS FORMUALTED BY THE INVESTIGATION UNIT OF THE STATE POLICE IN VIOLATION OF THE APA AND NOT FORMULATED BY THE LEGISLATURE. Quote HISTORICAL PROOF: THE INVESTIGATION UNIT OF THE STATE POLICE CREATED THE SICCARDI RULE WHICH BECAME NJAC 13:54-2.4d-1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
njJoniGuy 2,131 Posted January 29, 2018 How about if someone with a Farcebook account copies and pastes the entire case as linked in the original post. Thanks https://www.facebook.com/download/177195586379562/cheeseman jillard appeal THIS ARGUMENT DOES NOT CHALLENGE THE STATUTE final draft.pdf?hash=Acq5Vn701cXLERzp Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Oakridgefirearms 224 Posted January 29, 2018 Can't view the links, and I do have a Facebook account Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DirtyDigz 1,812 Posted January 29, 2018 Ok, let me see if I can attach the PDF here - the formatting of the PDF does not lend itself to a straight copy/paste. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DirtyDigz 1,812 Posted January 29, 2018 Removed facebook link, attached PDF to bottom of first post. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DirtyDigz 1,812 Posted January 29, 2018 As far as I can tell, here's the crux of the argument - that Heller precludes case-by-case determinations where constitutional rights are concerned: Quote But as of 2008, Heller has taken case-by-case determinations off the table: We know of no other enumerated constitutional right whose core protection has been subjected to a freestanding "interest-balancing" approach. The very enumeration of the right takes out of the hands of government—even the Third Branch of Government—the power to decide on a case-by-case basis whether the right is really worth insisting upon. A constitutional guarantee subject to future judges' assessments of its usefulness is no constitutional guarantee at all. Constitutional rights are enshrined with the scope they were understood to have when the people adopted them, whether or not future legislatures or (yes) even future judges think that scope too broad. [District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S. Ct. 2783 - Supreme Court (2008) at 2821. Emphasis by Applicants.] Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
voyager9 3,434 Posted January 29, 2018 42 minutes ago, DirtyDigz said: As far as I can tell, here's the crux of the argument - that Heller precludes case-by-case determinations where constitutional rights are concerned: That only flies if 2A applies outside one’s home. Something, I thought, the Heller decision steered clear of saying. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xXxplosive 824 Posted January 29, 2018 The NJSP has always run NJ.....they make the rules, not us.....always been that way and still is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
capt14k 2,052 Posted January 29, 2018 That only flies if 2A applies outside one’s home. Something, I thought, the Heller decision steered clear of saying. Heller and McDonald only dealt with ownership. However this lawsuit is genius. They are arguing that the judiciary is deciding a constitutional right on a case by case basis. This is a new angle. Being some permits have been issued to the elite the judiciary is saying they have a 2A right to keep and bear arms outside the home but others don't. Heller says that constitutional rights cannot be selectively applied and McDonald clarified that Heller applies to the States. NJ maybe screwed by it's own system.Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mrs. Peel 7,157 Posted January 29, 2018 Well, it's been argued that DC didn't appeal it's last big 2A case (Wrenn) because they thought they might lose --- and were likely under pressure from similar states where those reverberations would be felt. I tend to agree. Whatever name it goes by ("justifiable need" in NJ's case) our state and a handful of others are, in fact, CHOOSING who gets to be "full" citizens and who will be "lesser" in terms of exercising their constitutional rights. It's total B.S. to my non-lawyer eyes at least - and not what the framers had in mind AT ALL. I agree... the lawsuit has a compelling argument. My biggest 2 concerns now are: 1) Trump himself... his behavior, inexperience, big yap, tweets, all leading to his potential to be impeached... and 2) simply the unknown element of timing... meaning will he get the opportunity to complete one or more impactful SCOTUS replacement(s) PRIOR to the mid-terms (because post-mid-terms, everything likely gets infinitely harder for him to accomplish). Clock's running. Tick-tock. I'm a decent person - so I refuse to wish for the demise of any SCOTUS judge... I'll pray for some retirements instead. 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xXxplosive 824 Posted January 29, 2018 .....how about the Flu. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
voyager9 3,434 Posted January 29, 2018 3 hours ago, capt14k said: Heller and McDonald only dealt with ownership. However this lawsuit is genius. They are arguing that the judiciary is deciding a constitutional right on a case by case basis. This is a new angle. Being some permits have been issued to the elite the judiciary is saying they have a 2A right to keep and bear arms outside the home but others don't. Heller says that constitutional rights cannot be selectively applied and McDonald clarified that Heller applies to the States. NJ maybe screwed by it's own system. Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk The problem is the argument of selective application of a constitutional right is easy to defend based on CCW not being confirmed as a constitutionally protected right by SCOTUS. As you said, Heller and McDonald only covered ownership. Not a slam dunk case, and could easily backfire. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
capt14k 2,052 Posted January 29, 2018 Well, it's been argued that DC didn't appeal it's last big 2A case (Wrenn) because they thought they might lose --- and were likely under pressure from similar states where those reverberations would be felt. I tend to agree. Whatever name it goes by ("justifiable need" in NJ's case) our state and a handful of others are, in fact, CHOOSING who gets to be "full" citizens and who will be "lesser" in terms of exercising their constitutional rights. It's total B.S. to my non-lawyer eyes at least - and not what the framers had in mind AT ALL. I agree... the lawsuit has a compelling argument. My biggest 2 concerns now are: 1) Trump himself... his behavior, inexperience, big yap, tweets, all leading to his potential to be impeached... and 2) simply the unknown element of timing... meaning will he get the opportunity to complete one or more impactful SCOTUS replacement(s) PRIOR to the mid-terms (because post-mid-terms, everything likely gets infinitely harder for him to accomplish). Clock's running. Tick-tock. I'm a decent person - so I refuse to wish for the demise of any SCOTUS judge... I'll pray for some retirements instead. [emoji3]Trump will not get impeached. I haven't checked the House scenario still but even the Liberals know the Republicans will gain seats in the Senate. Even if Dems control the house the most they could do is draw articles of impeachment. The Senate does the actual impeaching. Not going to happen. As for Supreme Court Justices only the Senate deals with confirmation. Both SCOTUS and Trump are safe for the next 3 years. You can take that to the bank.Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyB 4,325 Posted January 29, 2018 3 hours ago, Mrs. Peel said: PRIOR to the mid-terms (because post-mid-terms, everything likely gets infinitely harder for him to accomplish). Clock's running. Tick-tock. Ah, so you are convinced the Dems will take back control of the House or Senate! I am remaining hopeful that will not happen and that the way the Dems have been acting and blocking everything Trump does will actually help us in the mid-terms. 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted January 29, 2018 6 minutes ago, JohnnyB said: Ah, so you are convinced the Dems will take back control of the House or Senate! I am remaining hopeful that will not happen and that the way the Dems have been acting and blocking everything Trump does will actually help us in the mid-terms. Pay check smiles happen in February.. im on your page 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
capt14k 2,052 Posted January 29, 2018 Ah, so you are convinced the Dems will take back control of the House or Senate! I am remaining hopeful that will not happen and that the way the Dems have been acting and blocking everything Trump does will actually help us in the mid-terms.The big number I was looking for came out today. Consumer Spending is at a post recession high. Trump is winning. Only because the Dems have history on their side and so many Republican incumbents retired I will revise my prediction to the Dems pick up 12 seats in the House and lose 8 seats in the Senate. Unfortunately due to the disaster in Alabama it won't be filibuster proof.Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1LtCAP 4,264 Posted January 30, 2018 40 minutes ago, capt14k said: Trump will not get impeached. I haven't checked the House scenario still but even the Liberals know the Republicans will gain seats in the Senate. Even if Dems control the house the most they could do is draw articles of impeachment. The Senate does the actual impeaching. Not going to happen. As for Supreme Court Justices only the Senate deals with confirmation. Both SCOTUS and Trump are safe for the next 3 years. You can take that to the bank. Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk just read an article in usatoday.....they say ginsberg is tooling up so to speak to see through trumps term to 2020. the article makes it seem as if she doesn't think that he'll get a 2nd term. i think he will. while i personally wish someone would smash his phone with a hammer........i suspect this is all some sort of plan....... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyB 4,325 Posted January 30, 2018 The one sided, anti Trump news media has taken it so far that I think they may actually help us! 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyB 4,325 Posted January 30, 2018 Just now, 1LtCAP said: just read an article in usatoday.....they say ginsberg is tooling up so to speak to see through trumps term to 2020. the article makes it seem as if she doesn't think that he'll get a 2nd term. i think he will. while i personally wish someone would smash his phone with a hammer........i suspect this is all some sort of plan....... The choice to stay till 2020 may not be up to her at all....................GOD WILLING! 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
capt14k 2,052 Posted January 30, 2018 just read an article in usatoday.....they say ginsberg is tooling up so to speak to see through trumps term to 2020. the article makes it seem as if she doesn't think that he'll get a 2nd term. i think he will. while i personally wish someone would smash his phone with a hammer........i suspect this is all some sort of plan.......Everything Trump does is calculated. Every tweet that seems stupid to many, there is a plan behind it. Think about how many tweets people thought were crazy that months later he was proven correct. For example him tweeting that he was being spied on. Now it looks like there was an organized effort by those in the FBI to defeat Trump and hand Hillary the election while abusing the FISA court system. Hopefully when they release the memo it brings even more of it to light. Ginsburg can decide not to retire, but she can't decide not to die. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mrs. Peel 7,157 Posted January 30, 2018 1 minute ago, JohnnyB said: The one sided, anti Trump news media has taken it so far that I think they may actually help us! I think you're being over-optimistic. Frankly, I hope you're right... and I do agree that the media has overplayed its hand, but then again, perhaps so has Trump. I tend to set my predictions based on what I see in other swing voters. I think you underestimate how much voters "in the middle" (even those that voted for him) are sick and tired of the tweets, the social gaffes, the unnecessary controversies. I've personally learned to grin and bear it... but in my social circle, I'm just seeing too many people that are expressing regrets with his performance. Apparently, they hoped he'd settle in and magically start "acting more presidential". That's a concern... to me anyway. You have to realize... those of you who are Trump fans, you rejoice at this stuff... but others are cringing... and not just those on the left. Anyway, again, I hope you're correct... because I'd like to see a few more SCOTUS appointments to slow down what I see as a "lurch" to the left in recent years. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyB 4,325 Posted January 30, 2018 I think Trump does shit on purpose to rile them up then sits back and laughs at how the idiots in the MSM take the bait. Trump is sly like a fox! 4 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted January 30, 2018 1 minute ago, Mrs. Peel said: I think you're being over-optimistic. Frankly, I hope you're right... and I do agree that the media has overplayed its hand, but then again, perhaps so has Trump. I tend to set my predictions based on what I see in other swing voters. I think you underestimate how much voters "in the middle" (even those that voted for him) are sick and tired of the tweets, the social gaffes, the unnecessary controversies. I've personally learned to grin and bear it... but in my social circle, I'm just seeing too many people that are expressing regrets with his performance. Apparently, they hoped he'd settle in and magically start "acting more presidential". That's a concern... to me anyway. You have to realize... those of you who are Trump fans, you rejoice at this stuff... but others are cringing... and not just those on the left. Anyway, again, I hope you're correct... because I'd like to see a few more SCOTUS appointments to slow down what I see as a "lurch" to the left in recent years. Coming from “ the middle” a shit hole is a shit hole... Kardashian’s care bout tweets. True story. Step outside your paradigm Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mrs. Peel 7,157 Posted January 30, 2018 1 minute ago, Zeke said: Coming from “ the middle” a shit hole is a shit hole... Kardashian’s care bout tweets. True story. Step outside your paradigm Actually, I have friends and family on both ends of the political spectrum. But I do tend to pay more attention to the moderates... because frankly, they are called swing voters for a reason... they are the ones that swing elections! And I'm hearing a worrisome level of grumbling. And although my own threshold for blunt language is fairly high, I still think many of you underestimate just how deeply offensive his vulgar comments are to a LOT of people (not just those who are reliably liberal/progressive)... there's a level of Trump burnout that I think is taking place, like it or not. Hey, just my opinion! But, we're drifting the thread --- back to the topic at hand... Go, Cheeseman & Jillard.. GO! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted January 30, 2018 Just now, Mrs. Peel said: Actually, I have friends and family on both ends of the political spectrum. But I do tend to pay more attention to the moderates... because frankly, they are called swing voters for a reason... they are the ones that swing elections! And I'm hearing a worrisome level of grumbling. And although my own threshold for blunt language is fairly high, I still think many of you underestimate just how deeply offensive his vulgar comments are to a LOT of people (not just those who are reliably liberal/progressive)... there's a level of Trump burnout that I think is taking place, like it or not. Hey, just my opinion! But, we're drifting the thread --- back to the topic at hand... Go, Cheeseman & Jillard.. GO! I disagree. Because I’m getting the opposite feed back from my friends across the country “ breath of fresh air” , “ say it and mean it” but this is pointless, and we shall see. I know you’re offended. History is the judge Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mrs. Peel 7,157 Posted January 30, 2018 1 minute ago, Zeke said: I disagree. Because I’m getting the opposite feed back from my friends across the country “ breath of fresh air” , “ say it and mean it” but this is pointless, and we shall see. I know you’re offended. History is the judge You think I'm offended? I voted for him and haven't regretted it yet. Yes, there are moments I'd love to rip his smart phone out of his hands and stomp it into teensy bits... but that's a minor irritation I've learned to deal with. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
voyager9 3,434 Posted January 30, 2018 I can buy “Trump Burnout” occurring with swing voters. Right or not they don’t want a president that sometimes acts like an 8th grader. I think him taking the high road once in a while, especially given recent media and democrat missteps, could really help his image rebound. Certainly the economy and other results will help and he should get out of the way. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
capt14k 2,052 Posted January 30, 2018 Actually, I have friends and family on both ends of the political spectrum. But I do tend to pay more attention to the moderates... because frankly, they are called swing voters for a reason... they are the ones that swing elections! And I'm hearing a worrisome level of grumbling. And although my own threshold for blunt language is fairly high, I still think many of you underestimate just how deeply offensive his vulgar comments are to a LOT of people (not just those who are reliably liberal/progressive)... there's a level of Trump burnout that I think is taking place, like it or not. Hey, just my opinion! But, we're drifting the thread --- back to the topic at hand... Go, Cheeseman & Jillard.. GO! You shouldn't put too much into swing voters. They don't vote. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/11/03/the-astonishing-decline-of-the-american-swing-voter/?utm_term=.46656fff2736 Elections today are won by energizing your base. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted January 30, 2018 13 minutes ago, Mrs. Peel said: I still think many of you underestimate just how deeply offensive his vulgar comments are That be offended there Bob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mrs. Peel 7,157 Posted January 30, 2018 1 minute ago, Zeke said: That be offended there Bob Perhaps I didn't express myself correctly? I've listened to others (generally moderate people) expressing great disdain for his "crass" "vulgar" "ugly" comments. (Their words, not mine). See how locked in people are? If I even float the idea that he might be losing critical votes, you all start getting your panties in a twist. Eegads! Back to the topic - Go, Cheeseman & Jillard! Godspeed! 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites