Jump to content
ChrisJM981

Thomas R. Rogers and ANJRPC v. Gurbir S. Grewal, et al

Recommended Posts

 So when do we find out if scotus will take it.      the communists and fifth columnists throughout NJ and the US are countering every suit fairly successfully by either not appealing or by issuing a permit.      I don't see much in this one that wasn't in any of the others, are there any other "good" ones going up to SC.    NYC seemed to figure out how to keep theirs from going to scotus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, revenger said:

 So when do we find out if scotus will take it.      the communists and fifth columnists throughout NJ and the US are countering every suit fairly successfully by either not appealing or by issuing a permit.      I don't see much in this one that wasn't in any of the others, are there any other "good" ones going up to SC.    NYC seemed to figure out how to keep theirs from going to scotus.

NY briefing has not been stayed yet.  In fact the petitioners have requested that the motion be denied.  Would be great if SCOTUS denied the motion and said nice try NY.

As for NJ the court will now schedule it for conference.  Should be soon.  I would think it will go to conference within next couple weeks.  Then it’s just a matter of how many conferences it takes for them to make a decision...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎19‎/‎2019 at 6:58 PM, Smokin .50 said:

Why not a bunch of denials?  Here's why:  Too many PUSSIES were afraid of a denial costing them the ability to apply for more P2P's!  OMG, what do I do if they ask me about a denial?

FACT:  No matter how many times Almeida was denied, he explained it all away and there was NO delay in processing P2P's.  Ever.

The Stockholm Syndrome is strong here...

I got my denial last year. It's too expensive to do again so soon. You have to do anothe Morphotrak background check ($$) and then qualify with the guns you want to carry at 50-60 rounds each (more $$). The staff at GFH blinked hard when I told them how many quals I wanted to run.

  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using the wait and see argument with NY and MA is a specious one. I have tried to find out the number of CCW permits in NJ and was told that information is private.  So how we supposed to find out how limited we are.  Also Heller  was started  because WASH DC would not let you carry a handgun from room to room let alone outside. 

If the present conservative  court does not grant to hear our case with AG's weak argument, I don't know  if we ever will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, drjjpdc said:

Using the wait and see argument with NY and MA is a specious one. I have tried to find out the number of CCW permits in NJ and was told that information is private.  So how we supposed to find out how limited we are.  Also Heller  was started  because WASH DC would not let you carry a handgun from room to room let alone outside. 

f the present coservative  court does not rant to hear  our case with AG's weak argument, I don't know  if we ever will.

I hate this state. When I'm at my home in Florida I can carry everyday almost anywhere. When I'm back here in NJ I can't have a gun when I leave my store late at night and drive home.  The gun laws in this state are nuts.  They really do favor the criminals.  When you visit a gun store in a free state or a gun show you really realize how crazy NJ is. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, DirtyDigz said:

I feel it’s much better written than the scribble Turban Man submitted. Much more convincing. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a big smile on my face.  Even if cert isn't granted, I really feel like these guys did a great job.  In particular, I like the response to NJ's assertion that there is no evidence regarding the percentage of permits granted: it doesn't matter.  The law is unconstitutional on its face because it de facto differentiates between people with a special, "justifable need" and "ordinary citizens".  The footnote is a nice touch, pointing out that the percentages are likely irrelevant because most people are discouraged from ever applying and going through and onerous and expensive process because they know they will be denied.

I've been disappointed so many times, but I will venture to say that I am optimistic about this.  It seems that with Thomas, Alito, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch cert should be granted since you need 4 justices to grant-- I will actually be shocked if it isn't.  Roberts has unfortunately become rather scary, and I worry that if cert is granted he could flip, but hard to believe that a Justice who signed onto Heller and Mcdonald would let this flagrantly unconstitutional law to stand.  I could see him insisting on as narrow a holding as possible.  We will see. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, PDM said:

I have a big smile on my face.  Even if cert isn't granted, I really feel like these guys did a great job.  In particular, I like the response to NJ's assertion that there is no evidence regarding the percentage of permits granted: it doesn't matter.  The law is unconstitutional on its face because it de facto differentiates between people with a special, "justifable need" and "ordinary citizens".  The footnote is a nice touch, pointing out that the percentages are likely irrelevant because most people are discouraged from ever applying and going through and onerous and expensive process because they know they will be denied.

I've been disappointed so many times, but I will venture to say that I am optimistic about this.  It seems that with Thomas, Alito, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch cert should be granted since you need 4 justices to grant-- I will actually be shocked if it isn't.  Roberts has unfortunately become rather scary, and I worry that if cert is granted he could flip, but hard to believe that a Justice who signed onto Heller and Mcdonald would let this flagrantly unconstitutional law to stand.  I could see him insisting on as narrow a holding as possible.  We will see. 

I will read the response brief shortly, however, I agree with your assessment.  I'm very optimistic that the true rule of law will be interpreted appropriately.  My wish is for Justice Kavanaugh to write the opinion and stick it solely into the chest of one Cory Booker, who made a mockery of his confirmation hearing.  No way Kavanaugh forgets Booker and payback/karma will be rightfully bestowed.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice job on the petitioner's reply by Dan Schmutter and colleagues.

I too would handicap SCOTUS like PDM.  The wild card is Roberts and I'm sure he is wrestling with the impact on the country, given its current state of political division, if the Court forces all the blue states to allow some form of carry outside the home.  Libturd heads would explode everywhere.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Princetonian58 said:

Nice job on the petitioner's reply by Dan Schmutter and colleagues.

I too would handicap SCOTUS like PDM.  The wild card is Roberts and I'm sure he is wrestling with the impact on the country, given its current state of political division, if the Court forces all the blue states to allow some form of carry outside the home.  Libturd heads would explode everywhere.

Agree.  However, Roberts needs to follow the Constitution.  And must do so with strict scrutiny in our case.  It is not supposed to be about wrestling with any personal views or outside noise.  The 2A is clear and States within the union that attempt to usurp it must be stopped.  

I get your sentiment and I too feel he is the wildcard, but being on the high court, Roberts need to put that stuff aside and rule based on law.  

Hopeful on my end here and for us all.

 

 

Edited by chic013
typo
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok. now.....please pardon if this is jumping the gun(yea, shitty pun intended, lol) and/or stupid. 

 

 so lets presume that this goes to the scotus. scotus strikes down nj's bs. what is the next step? can/will nj appeal? if they can't, can they then impose more stupidity to still make it nearly impossible or overly difficult for us?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 1LtCAP said:

ok. now.....please pardon if this is jumping the gun(yea, shitty pun intended, lol) and/or stupid. 

 

 so lets presume that this goes to the scotus. scotus strikes down nj's bs. what is the next step? can/will nj appeal? if they can't, can they then impose more stupidity to still make it nearly impossible or overly difficult for us?

Nj probably gets a defined amount of time to rewrite their unconstitutional carry laws. IIRC that's what happened with DC. 

There is no appeal after SCOTUS. 

It depends if SCOTUS addresses the level of scrutiny with which legislation involving the Second Amendment must be examined with. If it's strict scrutiny a lot of their laws will fall. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 1LtCAP said:

ok. now.....please pardon if this is jumping the gun(yea, shitty pun intended, lol) and/or stupid. 

 

 so lets presume that this goes to the scotus. scotus strikes down nj's bs. what is the next step? can/will nj appeal? if they can't, can they then impose more stupidity to still make it nearly impossible or overly difficult for us?

There's no soaking Scotus.

However, I would expect nj to engage in massive bullshit. Like making the permits incredibly expensive or making permitted carry unlawful in so many locations as to make it useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, 1LtCAP said:

ok. now.....please pardon if this is jumping the gun(yea, shitty pun intended, lol) and/or stupid. 

 

 so lets presume that this goes to the scotus. scotus strikes down nj's bs. what is the next step? can/will nj appeal? if they can't, can they then impose more stupidity to still make it nearly impossible or overly difficult for us?

 

3 hours ago, raz-0 said:

There's no soaking Scotus.

However, I would expect nj to engage in massive bullshit. Like making the permits incredibly expensive or making permitted carry unlawful in so many locations as to make it useless.

Yes they could require certifications, classes, fees, etc., long waits. They aren’t going down easy. But there’s no appeal. Spartacus and/or the pervert could try to introduce something but not with and likely success. 

My fingers are crossed that this will loosen up the many other rediculous infringements so we can act like adults with our guns. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing to remember about Roberts. He may be less firm on the gun issue. But it is clear that we have a conflict in the Circuit  Courts and he is not one to tolerate having them thumb their nose at the SCOTUS. There is also a trend among the states not to be ignored (Tennessee just passed their own law). This can affect not only NJ, but NY, Mass, etc.

Not only what happened  in DC but IL, where the 7th Circuit gave them about a 100 days or they would re-write the IL law themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ChrisJM981 said:

Nj probably gets a defined amount of time to rewrite their unconstitutional carry laws. IIRC that's what happened with DC. 

There is no appeal after SCOTUS. 

It depends if SCOTUS addresses the level of scrutiny with which legislation involving the Second Amendment must be examined with. If it's strict scrutiny a lot of their laws will fall. 

Theres always appeal after the SCOTUS.  Hopefully never needed but,

That is exactly what the 2nd was written for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They haven't listed an exact date yet, but they have all the documents from both sides now. Interesting that the NY case has been granted certiorari already, but that doesn't prevent them from hearing both cases and publishing oral arguments on both of them later.

Edited by drjjpdc
too much space

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



  •  

  • Supporting Vendors

  • Latest Topics

  • Similar Content

    • By NJGF
      Judge Kavanaugh and the Second Amendment
      http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/07/judge-kavanaugh-and-the-second-amendment/
      "....Kennedy sided with his more conservative colleagues in finding a Second Amendment right to have a handgun in the home, and there is no reason to believe that Judge Brett Kavanaugh, if confirmed, is likely to disagree"
      "....We know from his recorded dissents from the denial of review that Thomas would vote to review and overturn some existing gun laws, and we know that Gorsuch – at least to some extent – agrees with him. But it takes four votes to grant review in a case, and we do not know whether Roberts and Alito also agree with Thomas but have opted not to say so publicly, or whether they instead are content to leave the court’s gun-rights jurisprudence as it is."
      ".... just this week, the 9th Circuit struck down Hawaii’s ban on carrying weapons openly outside of the home; even if the case goes to the full 9th Circuit, the losing party is almost certain to ask the Supreme Court to weigh in."
    • By stuckinNJ
      https://www.nraila.org/articles/20171201/us-house-of-representatives-to-vote-on-hr-38-the-concealed-carry-reciprocity-act-next-week
       
      please take 60 seconds to call your reps, BOTH Republicans and Dems, urging their support. It seriously takes seconds. 
      No excuses
    • By fslater
      Hi Everyone
      I just Read the article in the Political report in Shooting Illustrated about The July ruling By the US Court Of Appeals that found DC's "good reason" to be granted a CCW unconstitutional. Wouldn't the conflicting rulings between the DC Federal Court and the Jersey District Federal court force the SCOUS to a hearing to resolve the conflict? This is old news from back in July I'm just hearing about now. If its already been discussed  please direct me to the thread.
      Thanks
    • By NJGF
      Supreme Court Asked to Review California’s 10-Day Waiting Period for Gun Purchases
      http://www.breitbart.com/california/2017/09/03/supreme-court-review-10-day-waiting-period-gun-purchases/?utm_campaign=coschedule&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=NSSF
      In Silvester, et.al. v. California Attorney General Zavier the district initially found that a 10 day waiting period to purchase guns did absolutely nothing to deter a person that already owns a gun from committing an impulsive crime.
      Of course the Court of Appeals for the 9th curcuit overturned the district court ruling.
      SAF's Alan Gottlieb is now asking SCOTUS to hear the case:
      "Remember what Senior Judge Anthony Ishii of the U.S. District Court said in his original order, that the state has tacit knowledge that a protected Second Amendment right is burdened by the waiting period law. His comparison of the waiting period to prior restraint is a point that should grab the attention of every journalist who has ever defended the First Amendment while disdaining the Second. A civil right is a right, and all rights are equal and deserve equal protection."
    • By NJGF
      This Law Could Make or Break High-Capacity Magazine Bans
      http://www.realclearpolicy.com/articles/2017/08/16/this_law_could_make_or_break_high-capacity_magazine_bans.html
      'California’s Proposition 63 presents a rare opportunity for the Court to step in and make clear that if Americans have a right to any weapon “in common lawful use,” that includes the whole weapon — not just the parts that don’t frighten the California legislature.'
      The article lays out clearly why magazine bans are unconstitutional under both the second amendment and the fifth amendment "Takings Clause".
      This case could obviously directly help New Jersey.
  • Posts

    • Anyone have any idea when these are coming out? Can't seem to find it anywhere. https://www.remington.com/shotguns/tactical/v3-tactical Thanks.
    • you lost me at "NO - ALCOHOL"!  That condition is totally unacceptable! 
    • I cast another vote for Sea Bands.  On a river or on a lake i'm fine, but on the ocean when there boat is pitching, rolling, yawing and heaving, I puke until I dry heave, then I dry heave until I'm back on land.  I don't get motion sickness on planes, helicopters, motor-vehicles, etc but boat smaller than a cruise ship, I get sick. I use sea bands and they worked. 
    • I stopped by there today.  Glenn, the owner, took me on a full tour of the entire place.  This is NOT Hague's!  I was shocked by the range! It was huge! I asked him if he widened it. He said no. The range looks very bright, modern and I could not believe I was even in the same building!       The shop is open now and the new range will be open on Monday, July 22nd!  Having seen it.  I will absolutely join this week.  Members can bring a guest for $10. You CAN use your own ammo but no green tip ammo. Rifle okay up to .308.       I have the membership form if anyone wants a copy.  No I don't work there but I am excited to have such a great place within 2 miles of my house!       We should definitely have a meetup there.  I will talk to Glenn and see what we can do based on turnout interest.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information