« Proposed changes to gun trust rules pushed back to 2015 | Main | Hillary Clinton on gun rights »
Supreme Ct denies cert in Drake v. Jerejian
Order here. As is traditional, no reason is given. In any event, different Justices may have different reasons. By my count, the Court granted two petitions for cert. and denied over a hundred of them, underscoring the fact that petitions face long odds.
Two of the petitioners must have hacked off the Court, since the denials include "As the petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court's process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and the petition is submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1." An elaborate way of saying "get lost."
5 Comments | Leave a comment
Unfortunately the courts will not save us. Honestly, we've been lucky enough to get what we have now. Courts love ruling for the government and twisting themselves into pretzels to do so.
There are two Americas, and the may issue states are the worst of the two. We best stay out of them.
I wonder if the present fluidity of Peruta contributed to this outcome. Had Peruta been firmly settled, maybe the circuit court conflicts would have been more "ripe". Being fluid, maybe they decided to wait and see what happens.
Here is a link to my press release on Drake v. Jerejian.
Sadly, it is very similar to past releases, posts and articles I have been writing for several years now.
I am of the opinion that until a case comes before the US Supreme Court that takes the position that the Heller decision meant exactly what it said and not the opposite or something else, SCOTUS will continue to deny cert until there are no Federal Circuits left to hear from.
So far we have had Federal Appellate Courts torpedo concealed carry in:
1st Circuit Court of Appeals - Hightower v. Boston (en banc denied).
2nd Circuit Court of Appeals - Kachalsky v Cacase (cert denied).
3rd Circuit Court of Appeals - Drake v. Jerejian (cert denied).
4th Circuit Court of Appeals - Woollard v. Gallagher (cert denied).
5th Circuit Court of Appeals - NRA v. McCraw (cert denied).
*7th Circuit Court of Appeals - Moore v. Madigan (en banc denied).
10th Circuit Court of Appeals - Peterson v. Martinez (en banc denied).
* In Moore v. Madigan the 7th Circuit affirmed Heller's admonition that concealed carry could be banned.
There are only 11 numbered Circuit Courts of Appeal.
The SAF had a case appealed to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals but before the case could be heard, the law was changed which made the appeal moot. However, that leaves the district court decision still standing.
This leaves the 9th Circuit Perura/Richards/Baker decision and the stuck in district court case Palmer v. D.C. as the last two roads to SCOTUS that I am aware of.
I am unaware of any SAF or NRA "carry" cases in the remaining appellate districts.
http://secure.campaigner.com/Campaigner/Public/t.show?6ktsa--3keop-fox07k1&_v=2
Charles: is Hightower v. Boston being appealed to the Supreme Court?
Peterson v. Martinez doesn't appear to be good at the small glance I just took, but it's a reciprocity case, all the states in the 10th Circuit are shall issue (and in the post-Sandy Hook spasm a ban on shall issue on public college campuses was the only measure I can remember failing in Colorado.)
But unless everything I've heard is wrong, Moore v. Madigan ordered Illinois to set up a shall issue regime, which they did, without an appeal to the Supreme Court. Could you be more specific about why this is a bad decision? The facts on the ground don't seem to support that.
Except for the 9th, all of the other Circuits are composed of shall issue states, so there's no issue besides reciprocity that could be brought up in them.
This sucks. This was a very good vehicle for challenging "may issue".
What other paths can exist for challenging "may issue" in NY, NJ and MD?