Oregon Measure 114 litigation

[Librarian]

A follow-on, https://t.co/7QHESMRwxI

INTERVENOR-DEFENDANT OREGON
ALLIANCE FOR GUN SAFETY'S
RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTIONS
FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

Remember, this is arguing to Judge Immergut, asserting her original denial was correct.

 

[Yarome]

A follow-on, https://t.co/7QHESMRwxI

INTERVENOR-DEFENDANT OREGON
ALLIANCE FOR GUN SAFETY'S
RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTIONS
FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

Remember, this is arguing to Judge Immergut, asserting her original denial was correct.

Just more woke jibberjabber... their main arguement that Bruen places the burden on the plantiff to show that standard mags were allowed(??)

Yeah, buddy! That's not how Bruen and the law works. When it comes to allowing gooberment regulation, the burden under Bruen is on the state to prove that they were not allowed or otherwise regulated. Pretty crystal clear, but thanks for playing!

 

[PiratePast40]

It seems like they're arguing their case before the trial starts. What's the purpose of this jibber jabber?

 

[CZP07]

it appears since we are paying for all this sheet, that the strategy is throw as much crap up on the wall and see what sticks. They have limitless funds.
But I wonder what Terrible Tina will do when the bills bite into her pet project of buying homeless shelters

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

It seems like they're arguing their case before the trial starts. What's the purpose of this jibber jabber?

Shockingly enough, to try and win before it goes to trial This process is pretty standard and both sides would prefer a summery judgment in their favor without the time and expense of a full trial

Edited to correct "Before" to "prefer"

 

[PiratePast40]

Shockingly enough, to try and win before it goes to trial This process is pretty standard and both sides would before a summery judgment in their favor without the time and expense of a full trial

Thanks for the explanation. That helps to explain why so much activity on both sides.

 

[Ura-Ki]

Say Goodbye OryGun, Judge Benitias is about to hand out the smack down bigly!
These 4 cases are all about to turn Oregon's 114 into a bad dream!

 

[jackrv]

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for this to happen. They've (California) has thumbed their nose at him and the Supreme Court for a long time.

 

[_Will_]

Fresh off the press. Wohoo State of Oregons AG petition to vacate 114 measure TRO denied by the Oregon Supreme Court.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

Fresh off the press. Wohoo

View attachment 1362407

Too small. Do you have a link or summary?

 

[_Will_]

Too small. Do you have a link or summary?

Tony L. Aiello, Jr. - Civil Attorney

Tony L. Aiello, Jr. - Civil Attorney， Canby, Oregon. 560 次赞 · 359 人在谈论. 律师与律师事务所

www.facebook.com

 

[Dust2Dollars]

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

This morning the Oregon Supreme Court denied a petition filed by the state that had asked the Court to vacate preliminary orders challenging Ballot Measure 114.

Got it.

 

[_Will_]

This morning the Oregon Supreme Court denied a petition filed by the state that had asked the Court to vacate preliminary orders challenging Ballot Measure 114.

Got it.

That's the way i'm reading it also. This is a big win for us. That means the trial will continue with judge Raschio in Harney county.

 

[Hawaiian]

Oregon Supreme Court upholds order blocking new voter-approved gun laws

The Oregon Supreme Court has denied a petition to overturn a lower court ruling blocking the state’s new gun laws from taking effect. Ballot Measure 114’s provisions remain blocked in their entirety pending a lower court hearing on the measure’s constitutionality.

www.opb.org

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

This ruling is like a Philly Cheese stake, I'll take it and love it, but it would have been better Wit'

 

[arakboss]

Great news except for my wallet is wallowing around in a puddle of it's own tears.

 

[mhayd93]

Regardless of the Oregon Supreme Court’s thoughts on Measure 114, they clearly value and respect the judicial process; to have ruled in favor of the appeal would have undermined the purpose of lower courts while also being a blatantly political move.

 

[Hawaiian]

to have ruled in favor of the appeal would have undermined the purpose of lower courts while also being a blatantly political move.

Which is exactly what I expected them to do. Glad to be wrong on this one.

 

[Librarian]

See also the twitter copy of the memo -

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1623732670604738564