Oregon M114 Motion for Prelim Inj DENIED

[CorvallisOr]

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ord.170381/gov.uscourts.ord.170381.39.0.pdf

Read More

 

[CorvallisOr]

She really went sideways. Whoever mentioned Berkeley may have been right.
“Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate that they will suffer immediate and irreparable harm if this Court does not block Measure 114 from taking effect on December 8, 2022. Plaintiffs have not produced sufficient evidence at this stage to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of their challenge to Measure 114's restrictions on large-capacity magazines. Plaintiffs have also failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on their facial challenge to Measure 114's permitting provisions. “

 

[CorvallisOr]

“However, in light of the difficulty the State has conceded in terms of implementation of the permitting provisions at this stage, implementation of those permitting provisions is stayed for thirty days.”

 

[TTSX]

Well, at least we have a month to buy more guns?

 

[Danall]

Well, at least we have a month to buy more guns?

Only if you think they are going to really speed up the process of background checks, with the current backlog it is unlikely and i suspect an intentional slow down of processing.

 

[CorvallisOr]

The judge followed the logic first laid out in the Supplemental Brief filed by the California DOJ in Duncan v. Bonta and also argued by Oregon here -- “While magazines in general are necessary to the use of firearms for self-defense, Plaintiffs have not shown, at this stage, that magazines specifically capable of accepting more than ten rounds of ammunition are necessary to the use of firearms for self-defense.”

 

[BBQ Guy]

The judge followed the logic first laid out in the Supplemental Brief filed by the California DOJ in Duncan v. Bonta and also argued by Oregon here -- “While magazines in general are necessary to the use of firearms for self-defense, Plaintiffs have not shown, at this stage, that magazines specifically capable of accepting more than ten rounds of ammunition are necessary to the use of firearms for self-defense.”

That's why I believe it was an error to go after that part with the injunction request.

 

[CorvallisOr]

The judge followed the logic first laid out in the Supplemental Brief filed by the California DOJ in Duncan v. Bonta and also argued by Oregon here -- “While magazines in general are necessary to the use of firearms for self-defense, Plaintiffs have not shown, at this stage, that magazines specifically capable of accepting more than ten rounds of ammunition are necessary to the use of firearms for self-defense.”

The argument I developed (in my head) in response to the mag limit, is an analogy to bullets: the ban on LCMs is valid if it would be valid for a court to ban bullets that exceed say, 1300fps. (My understanding is that flintlocks and muskets tipped out around 1,000 fps +\-.). A state could argue that bullets traveling slowly, like a subsonic 9mm, are still lethal for self-defense, so we don’t need high velocity bullets that increase tissue damage. Would it be permissible for a state to anllow only slower bullets? I think the Supremes would say no, and they should say the same to the capacity of mags.

 

[awags_86]

The argument I developed (in my head) in response to the mag limit, is an analogy to bullets: the ban on LCMs is valid if it would be valid for a court to ban bullets that exceed say, 1300fps. (My understanding is that flintlocks and muskets tipped out around 1,000 fps +\-.). A state could argue that bullets traveling slowly, like a subsonic 9mm, are still lethal for self-defense, so we don’t need high velocity bullets that increase tissue damage. Would it be permissible for a state to anllow only slower bullets? I think the Supremes would say no, and they should say the same to the capacity of mags.

Whoa! Let’s not be giving them any bright ideas

 

[jackrv]

I'm going to take a wild stab and say that they are looking at Canada as we post.

Jack

 

[HDR]

She also denied Fitz v. Rosenblum as well on the same grounds.

 

[_Will_]

She also denied Fitz v. Rosenblum as well on the same grounds.

Horrible news... Just read it here. OFF really phucked up! They should have stayed clear and let FPC and the professionals take care of this.

Loading…

assets.nationbuilder.com

 

[Bsteinhauer28]

https://www.reddit.com/r/ORGuns/comments/zegmy6
Anyone on NWFA able to verify this?

 

[ocarolan]

Anyone on NWFA able to verify this?

Raschio is judge for the 24th District. It includes both Grant and Harney County.

Sounds like for now, half of Oregon (geographically) will keep allowing magazine transfers?

 

[Hawaiian]

Temporary restraining order placed on new gun law, hours after federal judge cleared it

Hours after a federal judge denied motions requested for a temporary restraining order to be placed against Measure 114, a circuit court judge granted a temporary restraining order on the entire me…

www.koin.com

Temporary restraining order placed on new gun law, hours after federal judge cleared it

 

[CorvallisOr]

Well, at least we have a month to buy more guns?

Yes, at least 30 days, pending further motions. These two motions were for temporary restraining orders (quick hearings) and the judge notes at the end: "Plaintiffs are entitled to a prompt hearing to determine whether a preliminary injunction should issue based on a more complete record. The parties are ordered to confer and propose a briefing schedule to this Court by December 7, 2022." So they have a few weeks to develop their arguments against her reasoning (if they can) and present better evidence with declarations citing to authorities, i.e., 99% of those that possess LCM are law abiding.

 

[CorvallisOr]

Horrible news... Just read it here. OFF really phucked up! They should have stayed clear and let FPC and the professionals take care of this.

Loading…

assets.nationbuilder.com

I have to agree. NSSF Complaint and Motion are much more straightforward and better organized.

 

[44Brent]

Horrible news... Just read it here. OFF really phucked up! They should have stayed clear and let FPC and the professionals take care of this.

I think you are making some invalid assumptions, which are:

1) The judge is honest.
2) The judge is not an ideologue.

If both assumptions are true, then brilliant arguments can save the day. But, I don't see any evidence that the judge is NOT an ideologue. The questions she posed indicated she is an ideologue. The only effect brilliant arguments will have on a dedicated ideologue, as that they may become a more-informed ideologue.

 

[PiratePast40]

I have to agree. NSSF Complaint and Motion are much more straightforward and better organized.

Both were presented at the same time and both had lawyers at the hearing. Attorneys for Fitz were remote, but still presented arguments. Both also made separate arguments after the defense had spoken. Both received separate letters from the judge. OFF did not represent both, they were separate.

 

[Librarian]

Not that I expect Immergut to rule differently, but she still must hear Eyre and Azzopardi.

And Asmussen before Judge Raschio is interesting, but I think AG will appeal to Oregon Supreme Court.