« Origins of the New York Sullivan Act | Main | Court strikes down ban on firearms in post offices »
4th Circuit takes 3 cases en banc
Story here. Normally, an appeal is heard by a three-judge panel; from that the loser can appeal to the entire court, en banc. En banc hearings are restricted by rule (requiring a split between panels or other special grounds).
In this case, a panel had struck down Maryland's permit requirements, and the court voted to take that en banc. While it was at it, it voted to take two more appeals en banc, even though the panels hadn't yet ruled. I've never seen that done before.
8 Comments | Leave a comment
Judges that do whatever the heck they want should be removed from office, stripped of their degrees and bar memberships and sent to some sh-thole country for the rest of their lives. Or we could give them old time western justice.
….The lefties have decided long ago that their cause is too important to follow the rules of law. They have progressed far enough through the judicial branch to trespass blatantly against the standard rules or precedent.
…As a citizen I owe no fidelity to their rulings. My loyalty harkens back to the basic principles of law which they have abandoned.
…Strength to your sword arm. We are going to need it.
Extra-judicial behavior by judges begets extra-judicial action by the people.
In other words, old time western justice, see above.
On This Week in Guns YT show there was speculation this move was done to prevent multiple rulings against the 2A using different reasoning. The anti gun judges, the speculation goes, want to come out with consistent reasoning against the 2A in all the cases.
But They Are Waging a Losing Battle Right Steve. The Supreme Court Has Already Ruled And It Overrules All Those Federal District & Appellate Courts As It Is Supreme Over ALL 60,000 Judicial Forums Across the Country & Territories.
Folks who believe the judiciary will ever do anything to reduce the power they have stolen needs to find an law article from around 93-94 concerning whether it's the law or the predilection of the judges that determines outcome. I recall it was shown to be predilection. Judges often smear brown stuff and claim to be able to foretell what it means akin to the tea leaf readers and psychics.
Fundamental Law Theory as expounded by Hamilton:
The subordinate is not empowered toe define the superior. Then I ask: Who is the superior the Creator or the created? Next, who is the superior, the Constitution or the branches of government? Lastly who is the superior, the Creator, We the People or the Constitution?
….And we all are Plato trying to define virtue .
…Aw, but Tom, reverting to the founding document is NOT extrajudicial. The Constitution starts out “ We the People “ for a reason. And Article III specifies that Judges only hold their office during good behavior. Ignoring Law and making it up as they go along to suit their political beliefs is not good behavior. Western justice ? Hardly. This all comes from the Eastern side of the Country.
They're just doing what the 9th Circuit has been doing for awhile with gun cases there. If the three-judge panel rules "wrong", then they get an en banc re-do. If three-judge panel rules "correctly" then the case doesn't get an en-banc re-do, and then cross their fingers that the USSC doesn't take the case.