springfieldxds

well the Hawaii case hasn't made it through the courts yet, basically the district court refused to hear the case at first, saf appealed that and the 9th circuit told the district court they have to hear the case and use the decision in peruta. Basically the 9th told the district court in Hawaii to hear the case and rule that Hawaii's law is unconstitutional after the district court in Hawaii rules like they're supposed to it'll go back to the 9th where the same 3 judges in the peruta case will affirm the districts decision, after that, the Hawaii AG has the option to either, accept the decision and change their law (very unlikely), appeal for an en banc hearing which will most likely be denied and if it is denied then the Hawaii AG has the option of appealing the case to scotus (very likely) which will then be a true split among courts if Hawaii decides not to appeal to scotus after the en banc is denied, then we still have a true split among the courts because the whole appeals process is done and Hawaii admitted defeat and will comply with the 9ths ruling, if this is true we still have the NJ case which is supposed to be heard by the NJ supreme court, hopefully soon, the NJ supreme court will rule against us and after they do, Nappen (the lawyer defending us in the nj supreme court case) can appeal that decision to scotus and using the split between the 3rd circuit and the 9th circuit as a persuasion to kind of force scotus to hear the case to solve the split

and just to add a little more info. if Harris is denied and nobody files for en banc including Hawaii then the 9th decision goes to being a true circuit split and then there is one more case that can be appealed to scotus with that split, its the NJ case thats going to be heard by the NJ supreme court that well probably lose, so theres other cases available to scotus to choose if the split becomes finalized

true but its a lot more involved than that, remember scotus hates 2a issues, they want to avoid them at all costs, so their thinking i believe is why take the case if we dont have to what i believe is the reason they re-listed drake a few times is they wanted to review that case and other similar cases like the 9th, when they realized that there isnt a true split among the courts yet from their research, they then probably decided against the case, basically thinking the 9th decision can still be reversed in an en banc decision i believe they want to see how the 9th plays out, if its reversed then they'll be happy because they can go on avoiding the 2a issue again, if its not reversed in the 9th, or en banc is denied then their hands are basically tied and they have to solve the split scotus knows more cases like drake are coming, they just want to see if they can avoid the issue or if they have to solve the split at the last second

it is very likely they will deny Harris motion to intervene, but i believe the only reason they will deny her is because the 9th knows that once Hawaii goes through the district court again and loses this time around, it is more than likely the Hawaii AG will ask for en banc and if denied which is most likely again, then the Hawaii AG will probably appeal to scotus again with a true split remember Hawaii is more stringent on permits than NJ, i believe Hawaii has only one active ccw holder

option 1 is the only true hope we have to see carrying become legal in NJ, there is always the case going to the NJ supreme court, but we have about a .000000001% chance of winning that case, and when we lose that case even if we appeal to scotus they will deny the hearing as the NJ Supreme will probably just affirm the 3rd circuits opinion leaving us with no split between our state high court and our federal appeals court lets just hope the 9th denies en banc and doesnt take 10 years to do so

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

anyone knows if SAF or Gura is going to come out with a public announcement, seemed like this case was their final hope for scotus anytime soon, sure we have peruta but that can take 10 years to reach scotus, and until then its very unlikely California or Hawaii will have some sort of shall issue, i wonder if they have anything else in mind, maybe they'll back the case heading to the nj scotus?

nope Illinois is set, makes me wish NJ had no carry option than this hell ridden "justifiable need", if we didnt have any carry option available to us wed probably have it by now just like Illinois

i dont believe so, i believe its completely secret from us lower class

this opens the flood gates, no reason now to fight the inevitable, the politicians along with the AG will use todays decision to fuel any new gun control laws they can think of, im pretty sure even Christie wont bother vetoing anymore

im having a hard time working today, it feels like a dream, i still cant believe it was denied

immediately lol where have you been the last 5 years, there is nothing more they can do in NJ, all that's left is they can dump all their money into NJ elections next time around, and even if they dump 500 million dollars into republican candidates in NJ there is about a 10% chance they'll take control of the house and senate, they know this to be true and after today im more than positive SAF will give up on us just like the NRA has

the NJ Supreme court is set, they don't even have to work in this case, their decision was already written for them, all they are going to do is copy and paste the ruling from the 3rd circuit and say we're done with the second amendment for another 70-100 years

unless SAF or the NRA can give an update today that puts some hope on the table i will probably cancel my membership to both of them, SAF did a lot trying to help us out but as of today there is nothing more they can do, they will probably forget us just as the NRA did

this is a joke right?

Peace Corps volunteers maybe i can see the scotus ruling already, the peace corps is not a military organization and because of this laws can be made forcing us to give them housing, food and whatever else they may need, before our children, before our family

wait there's also hope in DC, we just have to wait an infinite amount of time till the federal judge decides hes good and ready to rule

don't worry guys there's still hope, we still have Peruta, we just have to wait 10 mores years till its done moving through the courts nothing changed in California either guys, they got an accurate ruling, that's all, there's no time limit for the state to comply, they'll comply when its done moving through the courts, like i said in 10 years, and that's only if the current ruling stands and isn't reversed when all the judges in the ninth hear it and rule scotus knows this to be truth that's why they denied to hear drake today

today scotus basically reversed Heller and McDonald, maybe not in so many words but it was reversed, states can now make laws restricting the 2nd amendment as much as they would like, all they have to do is say its for public safety, they don't even have to show prof anymore

theres no where to go from here, when the justice system has failed us that's more than enough to realize this country needs to be fixed not just this state

From Live blog of orders and opinions | May 5, 2014 They have denied cert. in Drake v. Jerejian. by Amy Howe 9:31 AM - See more at: http://live.scotusblog.com/Event/Live_blog_of_orders_and_opinions__May_5_2014/115013621#sthash.furyesmZ.dpuf

Drake v. Jerejian Petition for certiorari denied on May 5, 2014

read the top next to where it says the case name

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/drake-v-jerejian/ here you go

the justice system is dead today, as of today you can move to another state and have more rights granted to you under the bill of rights than other states