Federal Appeals Court to Hear Two Cases Challenging D.C. Gun Law
DC Gun Law Gets Hearing Before Washington Appeals Court
This one kind of worries me, because of the judges:
Henderson is a known anti https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...7fa290-5e22-11e5-8e9e-dce8a2a2a679_story.html
Did Dissenting Judge in Heller III Call Out Anti-Gun Studies as Biased? - The Truth About Guns
Griffith is most likely an anti as he was one of the judges that put on hold a decision by U.S. District Court Judge Richard J. Leon that found that the city's gun regulation is probably unconstitutional https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...295d2a-2e53-11e6-9b37-42985f6a265c_story.html
Williams is an unknown and possibly anti (not that it matters as it looks like the panel was stacked in favor of the antis). The only ruling that I can find to point to this is Seegars vs Gonzales where he wrote that they weren't going to rule because it was "dealing with a non-First Amendment preenforcement challenge to a criminal statute that has not reached the court through agency proceedings". FindLaw's United States DC Circuit case and opinions.
I hope I'm wrong and they rule in favor of the SAF. If they do rule in our favor, creating a split, it makes this election even more important as to who gets to appoint the next SCOTUS judge.
Ray
DC Gun Law Gets Hearing Before Washington Appeals Court
abcnews said:On Tuesday, three judges will hear 20 minutes of arguments in each of the two cases. All three judges hearing the case — Karen LeCraft Henderson, Thomas B. Griffith and Stephen F. Williams — were appointed by Republican presidents.
This one kind of worries me, because of the judges:
Henderson is a known anti https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...7fa290-5e22-11e5-8e9e-dce8a2a2a679_story.html
Did Dissenting Judge in Heller III Call Out Anti-Gun Studies as Biased? - The Truth About Guns
Griffith is most likely an anti as he was one of the judges that put on hold a decision by U.S. District Court Judge Richard J. Leon that found that the city's gun regulation is probably unconstitutional https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...295d2a-2e53-11e6-9b37-42985f6a265c_story.html
Williams is an unknown and possibly anti (not that it matters as it looks like the panel was stacked in favor of the antis). The only ruling that I can find to point to this is Seegars vs Gonzales where he wrote that they weren't going to rule because it was "dealing with a non-First Amendment preenforcement challenge to a criminal statute that has not reached the court through agency proceedings". FindLaw's United States DC Circuit case and opinions.
I hope I'm wrong and they rule in favor of the SAF. If they do rule in our favor, creating a split, it makes this election even more important as to who gets to appoint the next SCOTUS judge.
Ray
