• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

National Rifle Association Drops Lawsuit against San Francisco

California Right To Carry

Regular Member
Dec 21, 2013
United States
A draft of my press release -> http://us11.campaign-archive1.com/?u=8983547b55225326e869dd6a1&id=acad5fbc9a&e=

The Jackson v. San Francisco page at my website -> http://blog.californiarighttocarry.org/?page_id=1776

Update September 1, 2015 by Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry Pursuant to the Order of the court dated August 14, 2015, the Plaintiffs filed an Unopposed Request to Dismiss Case and a Proposed Order to Dismiss the Case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 41(a)(2). Unless the district court judge decides otherwise, the dismissal is without prejudice which means that the Plaintiffs can refile their lawsuit at a later date. If the district court judge decides to dismiss the case with prejudice then the Plaintiffs would have to file an immediate appeal of the dismissal with prejudice. If they did not appeal then the Plaintiffs would not be able to challenge the law in the future. This lawsuit was filed on May 5, 2009. Between the initial filing of the Complaint and the Unopposed Request by the Plaintiffs to dismiss the case there are 167 docket entries (inclusive) and the lawsuit never made it past the denial of a preliminary injunction and that took over six years.

Unless the current US Supreme Court indicates a willingness to hear Second Amendment cases absent a circuit split for the justices to resolve, the lower courts will continue to pretend the Heller and McDonald decisions never happened. If Stare Decisis did not apply to this case then there is no such thing as Stare Decisis. The inferior courts are free to ignore binding precedents.

Fortunately, if I should lose my California Open Carry case on appeal then my loss will create multiple circuit splits, and not just on the Second Amendment. Were SCOTUS to deny my cert petition then the only thing left to conclude is that the high court is done with the Second Amendment.

Links to the documents are at my website.
Last edited by a moderator:


Jan 14, 2012
earth's crust
The court can rule whatever it wants it does not change facts.

But we got deadlines to pay our taxes .... these thieves in robes ... I'm gonna go up the steps of the SCOTUS bldg and air my grievances .. (huh....I cannot do freaking that! who said so....JUDGES..those rat bastages)

Good luck in your case ...