Oregon Measure 114 litigation

[PiratePast40]

I'm starting this thread in the hopes we can keep some information easier to find. One someone has VERIFIABLE information that any group is starting litigation, please post the information here. There will be plenty of rumors so be careful of your sources.

@Joe Link can we get this one pinned?

OFF should have legitimate information out within a week.

Be aware that some organizations are working on how to bend the knee to show compliance and not really doing anything to help the cause.

Read More

 

[RVTECH]

Be aware that some organizations are working on how to bend the knee

More like grab the ankles....

 

[Librarian]

Good idea.

As a long-time veteran of California suits, let me set some expectations for those new to the field.

First, courts run on horse-and-buggy time, not internet time. As eager as one might be for results, the process is sloooooow.

Second, Federal courts have no deadlines - they can take as long as they think they need.

Third, courts are immune to public pressure, and get pretty annoyed when they get hate mail. That does not mean they are immune to government pressure, and that does not mean that individual judges do not have their biases and opinions. But attempted communications to the court by non-lawyers or by lawyers not officially participating in the case can be quite harmful.

Fourth, courts will not read the things posted on this site or any other. Making an argument here does not mean that any of the litigants will, or will not, use similar reasoning. Posters here at NWF cannot 'win' the thread by force of expression or persistence; only what the court decisions state counts. If you post something that agrees with the court's opinion, you may enjoy your good luck.

Likely a suit cannot be filed before the SOS 'certifies' the election - no 'case or controversy' until the law actually exists and might be enforced. Call that January, 2023.

The case is likely to be filed at the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon.

First stage is a trial before one judge (for example, the CA case Duncan vs Bonta before Judge Benitez). There are clerical things, hearings, briefings, responses - realistically, one can expect it to be a year or more before a trial actually occurs. Then a month or more before a ruling.

Then, whoever loses appeals to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Eventually the case gets assigned to a 3-judge panel. Again, count on at least a year before the panel hears oral arguments, and 3 months to a year before they issue their opinion.

Then, the loser requests an en banc re-hearing at the 9th. If that is granted - and it need not be - the decision of the 3-judge panel is 'disappeared' and we run the briefing and amicus and hearings thing again up to oral arguments. And then the court takes that 3 months to a year.

And possibly, the loser seeks certiorari from the Supreme Court. That can take a year. If SCOTUS grants cert, could take another year - or, SCOTUS might grant, vacate, and remand (GVR) the case for re-hearing according to the court's instructions. That's what just happened after Bruen.

I am comfortable saying (not happy!) that a final decision is probably about 5 years away - 2028 - if things run the usual course.

So, folks have to prepare for a long haul, and have to invest the time to read and understand some of the legal arguments - because that's all the 'movement' one sees for a long time. In that regard, there needs to be a publicly accessible repository for the case filings; IIRC, those only appear for free at SCOTUS. CA has had Michel & Associates case pages, and some folks may have PACER accounts so they'll be able to download those documents.


TL;DR?
Expect certainly two, probably three levels of court case, each taking about a year and a half, starting January 2023, maybe ending 2028.

ETA -
Posted a bit in a different thread where a Redditor described legislative clean-up after a ballot measure. That takes time, and it might be the case that a lawsuit needs to be delayed until the legislature is done with that.

 

[156256Hunter]

The Federal District of Oregon would probably be a lot faster than anything filed Oregon State court, esp. if it has to go through the Oregon appeallate court system. The Oregon appellate system was incredibly slow even before the "pandemic shutdown".

 

[PiratePast40]

Thank you very much for your expertise and explanation of the process. I want to be clear that I was not expecting this forum to have an influence on the opinions, only to have this thread be a repository for information on litigation, instead of having it spread over the many threads that are popping up. Things are starting to roll with preliminary organization and funding plans. Just trying to keep the information in one place and easy to find.

 

[solv3nt]

More like grab the kankles....

Fixed it fur ya.

 

[Librarian]

Thank you very much for your expertise and explanation of the process. I want to be clear that I was not expecting this forum to have an influence on the opinions, only to have this thread be a repository for information on litigation, instead of having it spread over the many threads that are popping up. Things are starting to roll with preliminary organization and funding plans. Just trying to keep the information in one place and easy to find.

Entirely sensible; it's just that prior experience has shown that some folks get a bit exercised when they feel they are being ignored - even when they are, in fact, being ignored by the only folks who count in the process.

And fund raising! Ah, cannot forget that.

Cannot afford to hire Lionel Hutz for such a case. Good constitutional lawyers, what we need here, bill at around $500/hour, and then there are all the support services of researchers down to typists.

If Phil Knight has some change in the couch cushions, sending it to the plaintiff lawyers in the anti-114 suit would be appreciated.

 

[Librarian]

The Federal District of Oregon would probably be a lot faster than anything filed Oregon State court, esp. if it has to go through the Oregon appeallate court system. The Oregon appellate system was incredibly slow even before the "pandemic shutdown".

Since I anticipate the grounds for suit will be 2nd Amendment, starting in Federal court seems likely.

 

[156256Hunter]

Yep, I wanted to clarify at least it probably wouldn't have to be litigated through slower state court!

 

[Ura-Ki]

So, a realistic timeline for an Injunction would be, At Best, Sometime around Feb or March, given the Court would need time for all the arguments and such, Sound accurate?

 

[Andy54Hawken]

@PiratePast40
Stuck / pinned thread.
Great idea you have here.
Andy

 

[E4mafia]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1590767325481172992

Their current work:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1590571049405779968

 

[3MTA3]

I was an original Seahawks fan going back to year 1 in 1976. For the next almost 30 years I learned a valuable lesson: If your team spends all it's play time on defense they will lose every single time.

If that sounds familiar, it's exactly how the firearms community has played the game since the 1960's. At some point we need to go on the offensive instead of waiting for our opponents to try the next takeaway. They can try ten or more times and only need to win once, then they come back for more. We have to win. Every. Single. Time. Forever.

Unless we can work through this current takeaway from law abiding citizens and start making them feel some pain each time they try we will never stop them and at some point this will be a forum where we can look at pictures of what we used to be able to possess. Under strict supervision, of course...

I will support any groups that takes this case on and I really, really hope they coordinate and cooperate with each other. This will take years whether we win or not, but our strategy needs to include getting back more than they took.

We also need to start going after individuals that unlawfully facilitated the taking Constitutional rights. Specifically the State AG who allowed an Initiative to proceed that violates the ban on laws that have more than one subject. When the first citizen loses their life because they were denied timely access to a firearm for self defense the people who sponsored this initiative need to be personally sued for damages and it needs to happen each and every time.

The offense needs to get off the effing bench for more than four plays at a time: three downs and a punt. The vast majority of my financial support will be to those that are willing to go for the throat.

 

[Longwalkhome]

We spend our time putting out fires rather than removing the arsonist.

 

[Ura-Ki]

I was an original Seahawks fan going back to year 1 in 1976. For the next almost 30 years I learned a valuable lesson: If your team spends all it's play time on defense they will lose every single time.

If that sounds familiar, it's exactly how the firearms community has played the game since the 1960's. At some point we need to go on the offensive instead of waiting for our opponents to try the next takeaway. They can try ten or more times and only need to win once, then they come back for more. We have to win. Every. Single. Time. Forever.

Unless we can work through this current takeaway from law abiding citizens and start making them feel some pain each time they try we will never stop them and at some point this will be a forum where we can look at pictures of what we used to be able to possess. Under strict supervision, of course...

I will support any groups that takes this case on and I really, really hope they coordinate and cooperate with each other. This will take years whether we win or not, but our strategy needs to include getting back more than they took.

We also need to start going after individuals that unlawfully facilitated the taking Constitutional rights. Specifically the State AG who allowed an Initiative to proceed that violates the ban on laws that have more than one subject. When the first citizen loses their life because they were denied timely access to a firearm for self defense the people who sponsored this initiative need to be personally sued for damages and it needs to happen each and every time.

The offense needs to get off the effing bench for more than four three down and a punt. The vast majority of my financial support will be to those that are willing to go for the throat.

Can I get an A-men Brother!

I have been posting this for a while, we really need to go after the big fish, and that STARTS with the Sec-State, and we don't stop until we have removed the A.G! We need to make this HURT them, BAD!

We also need to take down LEVO, that's likely a Civil Suit, and we need to Bankrupt them and send their supporters packing, and I would press a civil suit against the anti orgs, specifically Gifford's and any other found donating to the cause here in Oregon! They wanna play with fire, it's time we make them BURN for it!

 

[jayR]

https://sos.oregon.gov/elections/Documents/RecallManual.pdf

 

[Ura-Ki]

Here is what were fighting, while this isn't Oregon Specifically, it IS the new Road Map the Antis are using!

 

[Ura-Ki]

Here is the list of Pro 2nd Orgs who are fighting for us and need our support any way we can give it!
Note, he HATES the NRA, and in my opinion, justly deserved!

This is my new Fav. Channel, This guy is awesome and really lays it out for everyone in a clear and understandable manor!
I urge everyone to like and subscribe to this channel, This Guy really needs to hear how much we appreciate his work!

 

[nehalemguy]

Good idea.

As a long-time veteran of California suits, let me set some expectations for those new to the field.

First, courts run on horse-and-buggy time, not internet time. As eager as one might be for results, the process is sloooooow.

Second, Federal courts have no deadlines - they can take as long as they think they need.

Third, courts are immune to public pressure, and get pretty annoyed when they get hate mail. That does not mean they are immune to government pressure, and that does not mean that individual judges do not have their biases and opinions. But attempted communications to the court by non-lawyers or by lawyers not officially participating in the case can be quite harmful.

Fourth, courts will not read the things posted on this site or any other. Making an argument here does not mean that any of the litigants will, or will not, use similar reasoning. Posters here at NWF cannot 'win' the thread by force of expression or persistence; only what the court decisions state counts. If you post something that agrees with the court's opinion, you may enjoy your good luck.

Likely a suit cannot be filed before the SOS 'certifies' the election - no 'case or controversy' until the law actually exists and might be enforced. Call that January, 2023.

The case is likely to be filed at the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon.

First stage is a trial before one judge (for example, the CA case Duncan vs Bonta before Judge Benitez). There are clerical things, hearings, briefings, responses - realistically, one can expect it to be a year or more before a trial actually occurs. Then a month or more before a ruling.

Then, whoever loses appeals to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Eventually the case gets assigned to a 3-judge panel. Again, count on at least a year before the panel hears oral arguments, and 3 months to a year before they issue their opinion.

Then, the loser requests an en banc re-hearing at the 9th. If that is granted - and it need not be - the decision of the 3-judge panel is 'disappeared' and we run the briefing and amicus and hearings thing again up to oral arguments. And then the court takes that 3 months to a year.

And possibly, the loser seeks certiorari from the Supreme Court. That can take a year. If SCOTUS grants cert, could take another year - or, SCOTUS might grant, vacate, and remand (GVR) the case for re-hearing according to the court's instructions. That's what just happened after Bruen.

I am comfortable saying (not happy!) that a final decision is probably about 5 years away - 2028 - if things run the usual course.

So, folks have to prepare for a long haul, and have to invest the time to read and understand some of the legal arguments - because that's all the 'movement' one sees for a long time. In that regard, there needs to be a publicly accessible repository for the case filings; IIRC, those only appear for free at SCOTUS. CA has had Michel & Associates case pages, and some folks may have PACER accounts so they'll be able to download those documents.


TL;DR?
Expect certainly two, probably three levels of court case, each taking about a year and a half, starting January 2023, maybe ending 2028.

Alan Gottlieb from the Second Amendment Foundation was on the radio today talking about this very subject.

He stated that they have a lawsuit and plaintiffs ready for when it's go-time. He confirmed that the suit will be filed in Federal Court and they will ask for an injunction right from the start to put the measure on hold while the legal wrangling goes on.

-E-

 

[SonicBlue03]

Gottlieb is who I throw my money to. He's one of the only ones I trust to dig in and get bloody on these things.