Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No link, have not yet seen it. Don't see it on the GOA site.An amicus brief was filed in our OFF's lawsuit by GOA
Really no secret there. The mag ban is the most obvious constitutional infringement, so the easiest argument for an injunction. Once the injunction is issued, the next step is to unpack everything in the measure during discovery. Not sure why FPC is going down the same path. If OFF is either successful or fails, the FPC filing seems redundant on one hand and already defeated on the other. I would have thought that a different argument would be the path for the second complaint.I read the filing by OFF the day it was filed, then today read the AG's response to that filing. Then I read the nearly simultaneous filing by FPC. It's like they already knew how the AG would respond to the filing by OFF. They checked all the boxes. FPC states in social media posts that there is definitely more to come other than just suing over the mag ban. They are likely waiting until after the 8th, which I think is wise. These guys are pros. Just tossed another donation at them. Everyone here should be supporting all current organizations who are taking action.
That's my thoughts as well. What's to keep the courts from merely combining the suits into one, instead of proceeding with two or three separate cases that address the (more or less) same single issue?Really no secret there. The mag ban is the most obvious constitutional infringement, so the easiest argument for an injunction. Once the injunction is issued, the next step is to unpack everything in the measure during discovery. Not sure why FPC is going down the same path. If OFF is either successful or fails, the FPC filing seems redundant on one hand and already defeated on the other. I would have thought that a different argument would be the path for the second complaint.
Done, done, and done....TIme to break out the debit cards for OFF, FPC and SAF if you wanna walk the walk for those defending our civil rights
Done, done, and done....
If you read the AG's response to OFF's request for an injunction (ridiculous as some of her arguments are) it appears she was more than ready for it and addressed a lot of potential legal shortcomings in the filing. The filing by FPC covered all those things.That my thoughts as well. What's to keep the courts from merely combining the suits into one, instead of proceeding with two or three separate cases that address the (more or less) same single issue?
Just reading through the AG responses and dismissing all of OFF/ plaintiff's first compliants they plan on fighting this all the way. Even going so far as saying DC vs Heller only protected "firearms in common usage, the AR15 was never historically protected by the 2nd amendment"I don't think a lot people here have read the AG's response to the first motion for preliminary injunction filed by OFF. Though she takes an obvious stance from the CA playbook, I can see where she poked some big holes in their filing. This may be what FPC saw coming and therefore filed their own motion that addresses things potentially missed by OFF's council.
DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS' EMERGENCY MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
The most popular and best selling rifle type in America somehow not in common usage. That's going to stick like water on teflonJust reading through the AG responses and dismissing all of OFF/ plaintiff's first compliants they plan on fighting this all the way. Even going so far as saying DC vs Heller only protected "firearms in common usage, the AR15 was never historically protected by the 2nd amendment"
How do we obtain these documents when they first come out?I don't think a lot people here have read the AG's response to the first motion for preliminary injunction filed by OFF. Though she takes an obvious stance from the CA playbook, I can see where she poked some big holes in their filing. This may be what FPC saw coming and therefore filed their own motion that addresses things potentially missed by OFF's council.
DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS' EMERGENCY MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
And ALL of the communications between those groups and LEVO. I don't think it's too tinfoil hat to assume a bit of collusion there.I hope the plaintiffs dig deep and get a lot of good discovery, including pre-November 8 communications/memos/analyses etc. between the OSP, the Governor, and Secretary of State discussing what they really thought of this measure. Don't forget to ask for text messages -- maybe some of the officials tried to keep things off official radar. And I hope defendants don't claim they forgot to save all that stuff.