• 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.

Palmer files a motion to hold DC in contempt of court

cloudcroft

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
1,863
Location
El Paso, TX
...but not ANY movement towards shall-issue, just some lip-service, act-like-we-care "trivia" only.

Sad...

The court will need to FORCE DC to do what it SHOULD be doing. And the sooner, the better.

Then, we need Federal District Court 9 to FORCE HI to do the very same...and the Federal District Courts of ALL of the OTHER states with "may-issue" policies (IIRC, 9 such states in total).

Actually, the spineless SCOTUS should be calling these states unconstitutional...but they avoid "controversial" legal issues whenever possible.
 
Last edited:

swinokur

Activist Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
919
Location
Montgomery County, MD
DC has asked the Circuit to"hold" their appeal pending the outcome at District.

seems like trying to preserver their appeal rights without actually appealing.

IANAL.

11/25/2014 ENTRY OF APPEARANCE [1524393] filed by Holly M. Johnson and co-counsel Todd S. Kim on behalf of Appellants DC and Cathy L. Lanier. [14-7180] (Johnson, Holly)

11/25/2014 INCORRECT DOCKET ENTRY-DISREGARD--MOTION filed [1524395] by DC and Cathy L. Lanier to hold case in abeyance (Response to Motion served by mail due on 12/08/2014) [Service Date: 11/25/2014 by CM/ECF NDA] Pages: 1-10. [14-7180]--[Edited 11/26/2014 by JJA] (Johnson, Holly)

11/25/2014 CORRECTED MOTION filed [1524398] by DC and Cathy L. Lanier to hold case in abeyance (Response to Motion served by mail due on 12/08/2014) [Service Date: 11/25/2014 by CM/ECF NDA] Pages: 1-10. [14-7180] (Johnson, Holly)
 
Last edited:

rightwinglibertarian

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
827
Location
Seattle WA
DC's response submitted per Sculin's order.
The Court should deny the motion because the District has complied fully with the
Court’s Order, currently on appeal to the D.C. Circuit.
To justify a finding of contempt, plaintiffs must show that the District violated an order
that was “clear and unambiguous” by “clear and convincing evidence,” and that the District has
failed to make a good-faith substantial effort to comply with the Order.
ummmm.....so so much fail here :banghead:
 
Last edited:

swinokur

Activist Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
919
Location
Montgomery County, MD
Gura filed a motion for summary affirmance asking the court affirm the district court's favorable decision without further briefing. That was denied, which means that the case is assigned to a merits panel and the district's appeal will be fully briefed and argued. The denial was not a surprise because the standard for summary affirmance is very difficult to meet and was not satisfied here.

The district asked to the court appeals to hold its appeal in abeyance (not proceed with full briefing and argument) pending the current enforcement proceedings in district court. Gura strongly opposed and the court just agreed with Gura. That means that the case will go to full briefing and argument without waiting for the district court's decision on pending motions. Here it is again.
 

Superlite27

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
1,277
Location
God's Country, Missouri
....So as of now, the last action I see to have taken place on the case docket is submittal #88 by alan Gura on April 2nd, a notice concerning D.C.'s "appeal------> drop the appeal" stall tactics used to delay judgement.

What is the next occurrence and when is it likely to occur?

I'm assuming judgement on finding D.C. in contempt/not in contempt is the next thing, correct?

In order to keep my easily distracted mind focused, could a pundit more versed in lawyerspeak summarize what will likely occur and its meaning?

If D.C. is found in contempt.....what does that do?

If not..........?

What effect does the finding of contempt/not in contempt have on Mr. Palmer and firearm rights in D.C., generally, and is there any guess on a general timeframe when this will likely occur?
 

press1280

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2008
Messages
398
Location
Eastern Panhandle,WV ,
....So as of now, the last action I see to have taken place on the case docket is submittal #88 by alan Gura on April 2nd, a notice concerning D.C.'s "appeal------> drop the appeal" stall tactics used to delay judgement.

What is the next occurrence and when is it likely to occur?

I'm assuming judgement on finding D.C. in contempt/not in contempt is the next thing, correct?

In order to keep my easily distracted mind focused, could a pundit more versed in lawyerspeak summarize what will likely occur and its meaning?

If D.C. is found in contempt.....what does that do?

If not..........?

What effect does the finding of contempt/not in contempt have on Mr. Palmer and firearm rights in D.C., generally, and is there any guess on a general timeframe when this will likely occur?
I believe this case has effectively been dropped. DC has caved, but only in that they are not fighting for the total ban anymore. Wrenn v. DC ("good cause") will now take over.
 

Superlite27

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
1,277
Location
God's Country, Missouri
So, since the case has been "effectively dropped"........

Does this means D.C. is scrapping its "new, old law" and enacting a licensing mechanism consistent with Constitutional standards?

When is this mandated to occur.....since it has already passed the date so ordered in the original judgement?

Does D.C. now get a "bye" until they comply with the original finding in.....let's say....15 or 20 years?

The case (Palmer vs. D.C.) is still left unresolved as Palmer's injury, inability to obtain a CCW as previously posessed, has not been remedied.

1) The court ruled that D.C. had to enact a licensing mechanism consistent with Constitutional standards.

2) D.C. enacted "may issue" with impossible requirements.

3) Palmer did not "qualify".

4) Gura made a motion to hold D.C. in contempt, as Palmer's injury was not remedied.


...and now we're told the case is effectively dropped.


???

This means the above, right? D.C. has agreed to enact a Constitutionally agreeable licensing scheme to resolve Palmer's complaint?

When does this go into effect? When does Palmer get to holster his lawfully carried firearm for a stroll down the sidewalk in front of the Lincoln Memorial?
 

press1280

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2008
Messages
398
Location
Eastern Panhandle,WV ,
So, since the case has been "effectively dropped"........

Does this means D.C. is scrapping its "new, old law" and enacting a licensing mechanism consistent with Constitutional standards?

When is this mandated to occur.....since it has already passed the date so ordered in the original judgement?

Does D.C. now get a "bye" until they comply with the original finding in.....let's say....15 or 20 years?

The case (Palmer vs. D.C.) is still left unresolved as Palmer's injury, inability to obtain a CCW as previously posessed, has not been remedied.

1) The court ruled that D.C. had to enact a licensing mechanism consistent with Constitutional standards.

2) D.C. enacted "may issue" with impossible requirements.

3) Palmer did not "qualify".

4) Gura made a motion to hold D.C. in contempt, as Palmer's injury was not remedied.


...and now we're told the case is effectively dropped.


???

This means the above, right? D.C. has agreed to enact a Constitutionally agreeable licensing scheme to resolve Palmer's complaint?

When does this go into effect? When does Palmer get to holster his lawfully carried firearm for a stroll down the sidewalk in front of the Lincoln Memorial?
My info was wrong, I checked the archive and Palmer is still pursuing the contempt motion. DC is dropping their appeal, and we are waiting on Scullin to decide that. Of course, if he does decide DC is in contempt, watch DC run to the DC Circuit for an appeal.
 
Last edited:

California Right To Carry

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
462
Location
United States
My info was wrong, I checked the archive and Palmer is still pursuing the contempt motion. DC is dropping their appeal, and we are waiting on Scullin to decide that. Of course, if he does decide DC is in contempt, watch DC run to the DC Circuit for an appeal.
If DC is held in contempt it is highly unlikely there will be an appeal. Such a contempt holding would be largely symbolic with no real repercussions against the city.
 

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,939
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
If DC is held in contempt it is highly unlikely there will be an appeal. Such a contempt holding would be largely symbolic with no real repercussions against the city.
CRTC,

The meaningful or symbolic nature of a contempt finding would be predicated upon Scullins remedy rather than his finding. In his original ruling Scullins indicated may issue as not an appropriate response by the federal district. Whether Scullin addresses the issue in the contempt hearing or waits for the new may issue case to mature is very hard to predict. I know you have your opinions, most of which I agree with, but he is a senior judge who was assigned this case by the chief Justice of SCOTUS. We could yet see fireworks from this case.

Thundar
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,831
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
CRTC,

The meaningful or symbolic nature of a contempt finding would be predicated upon Scullins remedy rather than his finding. In his original ruling Scullins indicated may issue as not an appropriate response by the federal district. Whether Scullin addresses the issue in the contempt hearing or waits for the new may issue case to mature is very hard to predict. I know you have your opinions, most of which I agree with, but he is a senior judge who was assigned this case by the chief Justice of SCOTUS. We could yet see fireworks from this case.

Thundar
BRB - gotta get more popcorn....
 

HPmatt

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
1,460
Location
Dallas
I wonder if you could speed the DC government along by having a press release/media day (with Tv cameras and your attorneys present) handing out spent brass on DC street corners on the 4th of July ?

Do a little of that Liberal Activism back-at'em

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Top