Join INGunOwners For Free
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5
Results 41 to 49 of 49
  1. #41
    Marksman marvin02's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Found this one in the National Review while following above links:

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/...ights-lawsuit/

  2. #42
    Master historian's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by T.Lex View Post
    Actual brief here:
    https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketP...Whitehouse.pdf

    As a (mostly former) practitioner - yeah, the rhetoric is really bad. In the Indiana Supreme Court, I've seen rhetoric like than that admonished in a footnote about civility.



    Fortunately (or unfortunately) it masks pretty straightforward mootness arguments that every amicus on that side of the fence is making. So, assuming they can wade through the political posturing, it probably won't make a difference.

    ETA:
    I did not know Sheldon Whitehouse is a lawyer. Apparently, he filed the amicus as "Counsel of Record" for himself.

    First, there's an old saying, "An attorney who represents himself has a fool for a client." Case. Made.

    Second, the court, and whatever jurisdictions in which he holds a license, can hold him responsible for the content of his filings. Not that they actually will, but they can.
    I guess Gillibrand is just trying to get attention now. The other joiners are "expected."
    Everyone should own an Uzi

  3. #43
    Grandmaster T.Lex's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Its a little bit ironic, though, right? A politician/lawyer files a SCOTUS amicus brief suggesting other amici have ulterior motives for hidden agendas. Totally non-self-aware that the political motives and agenda for the screed are similarly veiled.

    Or obvious.

    I SO hope Justice Thomas unleashes on him.

    It'd be really cool to meet Thomas in real life and find out what his interests are....
    Resident Warning Shot Statist.

  4. #44
    Master historian's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by T.Lex View Post
    It'd be really cool to meet Thomas in real life and find out what his interests are....
    If only we had known someone who sat next to Thomas...

    The two Justices I would like to meet are Sotomayor and Roberts.
    Everyone should own an Uzi

  5. #45
    Grandmaster T.Lex's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Looks like oral argument is set for December. They'll have to figure out mootness first, but I think they already decided that.
    Resident Warning Shot Statist.

  6. #46
    Master historian's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    So...here is a question...I wonder if the Senators shot themselves (pun intended) with that brief. By attacking the court, rather than the case, I wonder if they might have moved a couple of votes to the majority for the purpose of protecting the institution. I could almost see a more narrow decision than we would like just because it would be 7-2 because the Senators made some people mad.
    Everyone should own an Uzi

  7. #47
    Grandmaster T.Lex's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Hard to tell.

    There are many tea leaves to read.
    Resident Warning Shot Statist.

  8. #48
    Master Alamo's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by T.Lex View Post
    ...

    It'd be really cool to meet Thomas in real life and find out what his interests are....
    I read some years back that the likes to travel in an RV and fish when SCOTUS is not in session. Invite him to Indiana for a fishing trip!

  9. #49
    Master Spear Dane's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Has there been any discussion by our resident beagals from legal regarding how this case could affect current cases like the bump stock ban or possible pending legislation regarding AR's and mags?
    Justin B. - "Make them watch Wonder Woman. They'll molon labe after that!"

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Button Dodge