Oregon Oregon AG Petitions Oregon Supreme Court to Overturn Judge Raschio

[solv3nt]

Honestly, that took longer than I would have expected.

State petitions OR Supreme Court to overturn Harney County judge’s orders blocking gun control Measure 114

“The longer that the trial court’s injunctive orders remain in effect—for the months or years in which the case is pending in that court—the greater the possibility of another comparable tragedy happening here in Oregon,” Assistant Attorney General Robert A. Koch wrote. “These dangers are real...

www.oregonlive.com

Read More

 

[uberguy]

"Koch countered in court filings Friday that Raschio made "fundamental legal" errors and acted beyond his discretion.

Oregon Constitution's Article 1, Sec. 27, protects only the right to bear arms commonly used by Oregonians for self-defense in 1859 and earlier, and doesn't relate to magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, Koch argued."

LOL

 

[jackrv]

If that is the case, is the AG going back to quill pens, ink pots and parchment ? Are they going back to the printing presses used in 1859?

Inquiring minds want to know
Jack

 

[orygun]

Our AG is as biased as can be. Doesn't matter what the State Constitution says, it doesn't fit her agenda.

 

[tiggers97]

"Koch countered in court filings Friday that Raschio made "fundamental legal" errors and acted beyond his discretion. Oregon Constitution's Article 1, Sec. 27, protects only the right to bear arms commonly used by Oregonians for self-defense in 1859 and earlier, and doesn't relate to magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, Koch argued."

LOL

Jokes on him, then. Back in 2020(?) LEVO was trying to get their gun ban ballot measure to the signature collection phase. OFF and others challenged it. The Everytown/Moms Demand lawyers who were involved attempted to make the exact same argument (Oregon constitution only protected guns in existence at the time of ratification), and the Oregon Supreme Court not only rejected the claim, but correctly identified that the term "Assault Weapon" was a political and ambiguous one, and couldn't be used.

If the Oregon Supreme Court is going to be consistent in such a short span of time, they will reject at least that part of the argument.

 

[Stomper]

Our AG is as biased as can be. Doesn't matter what the State Constitution says, it doesn't fit her agenda.

Well, my Danner Quarries will fit right up her a$$…..

 

[Stomper]

"Koch countered in court filings Friday that Raschio made "fundamental legal" errors and acted beyond his discretion. Oregon Constitution's Article 1, Sec. 27, protects only the right to bear arms commonly used by Oregonians for self-defense in 1859 and earlier, and doesn't relate to magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, Koch argued."

LOL

This guy must have graduated Supa-Dumb-Retardi in his law-school class….

 

[Hawaiian]

"Keeping people safe is a fundamental duty, mission, and purpose of government," Koch wrote.

Well, you sure are doing a great job on that with the huge increase in crime in Oregon!!! Fail!

 

[RobMa]

"Keeping people safe is a fundamental duty, mission, and purpose of government," Koch wrote.

Well, you sure are doing a great job on that with the huge increase in crime in Oregon!!! Fail!

"Keeping people dependent and obedient is a fundamental duty, mission, and purpose of government," Koch wrote.

Fixed it for ya...

 

[CZP07]

i was hoping to have heard something about this today.

 

[solv3nt]

i was hoping to have heard something about this today.

Patience young Frodo.

 

[BWH]

1859 we hung people for being bad.

 

[po18guy]

I smell Soros $

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

Historical president only applies to laws not arms. If arms are in common use for lawful purposes, then per Heller and Bruen they cannot be banned. Caetano set the common use bar at 200,000 in the nation.

 

[HDR]

In 1859 politicians who didn’t follow the law were tarred and feathered. Sounds fine to me.

 

[br1sket]

I really hope the US Supreme Court steps in soon regarding magazine bans, this game the Dems are playing saying "magazines aren't firearms" and thus can be restricted seems like a total bullbubblegum argument to me.

 

[Yarome]

I really hope the US Supreme Court steps in soon regarding magazine bans, this game the Dems are playing saying "magazines aren't firearms" and thus can be restricted seems like a total bullbubblegum argument to me.

Well... they are lying about that from the get go. There is numberous case law that expressly states... mags are "arms" and fully protected by the 2A.

They are ignoring/violating established law in many facets so is it really all that suprising they would lie and ignore established case law regarding mags, too?

Just like their argument that it is the will of the people that must be upheld when it has been established many times over that an inalienabl right of the people may not be voted away.

It's all BS through and through.

 

[The Heretic]

If the ATF can say that a trigger (e.g., DIAS or FRT) or a bump stock is a machine gun, and a suppressor is a firearm, then a magazine is an "arm".

 

[Mark W.]

Oregon only had about 52,000 people in 1859. And I would bet cash money 95% of them would have come to arms if they had had to deal with this silly crap.

 

[po18guy]

Historical president only applies to laws not arms. If arms are in common use for lawful purposes, then per Heller and Bruen they cannot be banned. Caetano set the common use bar at 200,000 in the nation.

20,000? Nothing like arbitrary and capricious. Yet, 20K is far better than 20M.