Palmer files a motion to hold DC in contempt of court

[California Right To Carry]

Update November 19, 2014 - Palmer upped the ante by filing a motion to hold the defendants in contempt of court. There was a minute entry from today regarding the telephone conference which reads as follows:

TEXT Minute Entry for Telephone Conference held on 11/19/2014 before Judge Frederick J. Scullin, Jr: Court advised that it would hear oral argument tomorrow, as scheduled, on motion for permanent injunction and motion for an order to have Defendants show cause why the Court should not hold Defendants in contempt. All agreed that the first issue to address was the scope of the Court’s jurisdiction given Defendants filing of Notice of Appeal. Court advised it would also hear arguments on the merits of Plaintiffs’ motions. Appearances: Alan Gura, Esq. for pltfs; Andrew Saindon, Esq. for defts. (Scullin, Frederick)

 

[BB62]

Good stuff! Is there a pdf of the motion?

 

[California Right To Carry]

Good stuff! Is there a pdf of the motion?

I've added a link to the main part of the motion at the update on my website.

 

[marshaul]

It's too bad they have to rely on "contempt of court". I think imposing outlawry on the entire DC government is eminently more suitable.

 

[cloudcroft]

Baby Steps, marshaul, Baby Steps...

-- Dr. Leo Marvin.

 

[swinokur]

Looks like the contempt motion is moving forward:

Filed & Entered: 11/20/2014 Scheduling Order
Docket Text: TEXT SCHEDULING ORDER: regarding the # [83] Motion for Order to Show Cause. Response to Motion due by 12/4/2014. Reply to Response to Motion due by 12/11/2014. IT IS SO ORDERED by Judge Frederick J. Scullin, Jr. on 11/20/2014. (Scullin, Frederick)

 

[Thundar]

Filed & Entered: 11/20/2014 Scheduling Order
Docket Text: TEXT SCHEDULING ORDER: regarding the # [83] Motion for Order to Show Cause. Response to Motion due by 12/4/2014. Reply to Response to Motion due by 12/11/2014. IT IS SO ORDERED by Judge Frederick J. Scullin, Jr. on 11/20/2014. (Scullin, Frederick)

What this says about the court's jurisdiction for the permanent injunction is very telling. DC has basically said that they wrote a new law and that Gura must file a new lawsuit in order to challenge the new law. Gura said, no, the current order is clear. DC said, well you didn't file a contempt motion so you are wrong. Gura filed a contempt motion.

Response and Reply to response complete 2 weeks before Christmas....

Dear Santa, What I want for Christmas is a permanent injunction and contempt charges against MPD Chief Lanier.

 

[Thundar]

Good stuff! Is there a pdf of the motion?

Here is the District Court docket: http://ia902305.us.archive.org/14/items/gov.uscourts.dcd.137887/gov.uscourts.dcd.137887.docket.html

 

[BB62]

Here is the District Court docket: http://ia902305.us.archive.org/14/items/gov.uscourts.dcd.137887/gov.uscourts.dcd.137887.docket.html

Thanks for the link. No insult meant, but the contempt request isn't linked to there. Someone else has linked to it previously on this thread, though.

 

[davidmcbeth]

They should be shot if the contempt order is successful-for being traitors !

 

[California Right To Carry]

Charles Nichols ‏@CRTC_Nichols
Palmer v. District of Columbia - It appears that Judge Scullin thinks the new DC handgun carry law is contemptuous. http://blog.californiarighttocarry.org/?page_id=1852
7:27 PM - 20 Nov 2014

 

[swinokur]

Filed last night

11/20/2014 84 TEXT SCHEDULING ORDER: regarding the # 83 Motion for Order to Show Cause. Response to Motion due by 12/4/2014. Reply to Response to Motion due by 12/11/2014. IT IS SO ORDERED by Judge Frederick J. Scullin, Jr. on 11/20/2014. (Scullin, Frederick) (Entered: 11/20/2014)

11/20/2014 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Frederick J. Scullin, Jr: Motion Hearing held on 11/20/2014. Oral argument heard re 83 MOTION for Order to Show Cause. (Court Reporter Jan Dickman) (gdf) (Entered: 11/20/2014)

 

[rightwinglibertarian]

I've been kinda busy lately and only just saw this news - on the Washington Times of all things. I didn't think such propaganda outlets cared about real news or the Constitution

 

[blahpony]

I've been kinda busy lately and only just saw this news - on the Washington Post of all things. I didn't think such propaganda outlets cared about real news or the Constitution

The Washington Times is very different than The Washington Post.

 

[rightwinglibertarian]

The Washington Times is very different than The Washington Post.

whoops! *goes to correct typo* I think I had too many tabs open

 

[swinokur]

The Times is decidedly conservative in it's viewpoint. especially compared to the Washington Fish Wrap

 

[Thundar]

Thanks for the link. No insult meant, but the contempt request isn't linked to there. Someone else has linked to it previously on this thread, though.

it is item 83 on the docket.

 

[BB62]

it is item 83 on the docket.

Thank you. Documents >= #83 weren't there at the time of my previous post.

 

[The Truth]

The NRA even shared a story about this on their FB.

Hopefully this turns out very well for the fine people of DC.

 

[swinokur]

DC council moving ahead on permanent legislation.

Good.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/24/dc-inches-closer-to-contempt-with-concealed-carry-/