User Panel
I invited Ted Cruz to the hearing and spoke to a staffer but he didn't show up.
|
|
|
Originally Posted By NoloContendere:
Argument from 1:30 to 3:14 or so. She was very interested in standing. She let gov go first to address standing then I replied. Then he rebutted. Then we got into the merits. As for a transcript, who knows when that will be available. No timeframe on decision and no decision from the bench. The court was very interested though and judge Lynn asked pointed questions to both the gov and of me. View Quote Get some. |
|
"All compromise is based on give and take, but there can be no give and take on fundamentals. Any compromise on mere fundamentals is a surrender. For it is all give and no take." -Ghandi
|
This makes me want to read the transcript SOONER.
Thanks very much Nolo, and all of the others involved. I REALLY appreciate that someone is at least trying. |
|
The constitution is what the justices say it is, rather than what it's framers or you might say it is - FDR - May God judge him less violently than I would.
|
do you have any examples of the pointed questions that you can share?
|
|
MYOB will be the death of our civil rights
|
I don't actually post here very often, but I have followed this thread since page one and would like to thank you all for sticking your necks out. I have, and will continue to donate.
Keep up the good work. |
|
|
Originally Posted By d16man:
Could that be construed as a good thing, meaning she didn't just toss it right away? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By d16man:
Originally Posted By NoloContendere:
Argument from 1:30 to 3:14 or so. She was very interested in standing. She let gov go first to address standing then I replied. Then he rebutted. Then we got into the merits. As for a transcript, who knows when that will be available. No timeframe on decision and no decision from the bench. The court was very interested though and judge Lynn asked pointed questions to both the gov and of me. Could that be construed as a good thing, meaning she didn't just toss it right away? Take nothing from it. She could be genuinely open and looking to be swayed or looking for counter arguments she needs to buttress an opinion against. You just can't tell from questions from the bench. I'll be stoked if she rules as quick as 3 months from now. |
|
This is Arfcom GD. The type of loving you want, you don't get. The type of loving you get, you don't want. -Booze
"Arfcom is like a bitter redneck version of anonymous." - An Intacto Arms Supporter |
"History is replete with the sound of silken slippers going downstairs and wooden shoes coming up." -Voltaire
|
|
Man... If I had to do something important like that I would be knee deep in Maker's by now. Much respect.
So when does something else happen? |
|
Originally posted by DK-Prof: lol
Hotty Toddy!! |
Keep it up Nolo!...cant wait to read the transcripts
|
|
|
Another attendee here. I'll try to summarize, but I have zero experience in a courtroom, so my interpretation of events is pretty sketchy.
When I got there, Nolo and the others asked who I was. I didn't know who was who, so I wasn't quite sure how to respond; "I'm from the internet" doesn't really sound appropriate. Told them I was from the "website", which seemed to work :-) Everybody was dressed very professionally and made it through street-level and court-level security successfully. It turned out to be fairly sparsely attended. Nolo had two others with him for legal support, and the feds had two guys. Nolo did all the talking for us, a short youngish guy spoke for DOJ. I think it was scheduled for about an hour, but it ran for 1:45, from 13:30 to 15:15. DISCLAIMER... My notes are just general bullet points I jotted down. I'm no stenographer, so it's far from complete or comprehensive. Just trying to draw a bit of a picture for the gang here. Judge Lynn started out by having DOJ review issues related to "standing". DOJ: Injury discussion Commerce clause Even if federal law allowed MGs, TX law does not, so this case is irrelevant The Dakota silencer letter (trust is not a person) Referenced the relevance of a cockfighting case! NFA safe harbor Nolo: During introduction, Judge asked Nolo to pronounce his name 2-3 times Fed definition of MG differs from TX definition; more than one shot per trigger pull vs more than two. Therefore a fed decision is not directly transferrable to state (?) Maddox letter (Dakota letter) Explained the specific situation of ATF approving the Hollis Form 1, and other Forms 1s as well, but ATF has no authorized process or authority for disapproval, so this is a "due process" issue In response to a question, tried to explain the ATF's Form 1 approval process to the Judge, which isn't really publicly documented, but requires supervisory approval in addition to examiner approval. A mistake doesn't just happen by one person's accidental mark on the form approval, it was vetted and approved. Judge acknowledged that she is not all that familiar with NFA/2A issues DOJ: Surprised at difference between fed and TX definition of MG Claimed that a trust is still a person, regardless of any letter stating otherwise Played down the importance of ATF reversing their decision after an erroneous approval Then it got into more general 2A issue discussions. DOJ: References Heller and the Supreme Court decision, and nothing in the Heller decision prevents banning of MGs Claims ATF doesn't have authority to approve Form 1 MGs due to existing law MGs are "dangerous and unusual" and therefore not protected by 2A MGs not commonly used for protection MGs commonly adapted for criminal use MGs outside the scope of 2A And other standardized .gov arguments against MGs Discussed relevance of scrutiny levels, i.e., intermediate, strict scrutiny Nolo: Explained that based on prior Form 1 approvals that ATF does in fact have authority to approve MGs, e.g., Stemple M60s that were approved post-86. Judge looked at copy of approved Form 1 for one of the Stemple M60s, and asked about the date, which had been redacted. Nolo offered to provide details of this case at a later date to help provide relevance. Disputed DOJ assertion than MGs are commonly used for criminal use, extremely small percentage compared to handguns Requested the court to define "dangerous and unusual", since term is thrown around loosely, but other courts have not defined it Addressed various DOJ anti-MG rhetoric DOJ: Tried to reenforce their earlier claims that relevant details of Miller and Heller ruling do intersect And that was it. No decision from the Judge, she just disappeared through the little door behind her bench. Another case that was scheduled to start at 15:00 had quite a few other people coming into the courtroom starting about 14:45, so Judge Lynn was kind enough to let our case continue for a bit longer, with all the attorneys trying to be brief at the end. I expected yelling and banging on tables during the hearing, but everybody was very congenial and just stated their points. Both legal teams chatted with each other outside the courtroom afterwards. Then our group, the legal team and observers, visited for a bit outside by the courthouse. Very interesting afternoon. I thought Nolo represented our side very well. Kicking myself for not buying some beers for Nolo afterwards. |
|
|
Originally Posted By Maroonfeather:
Another attendee here. I'll try to summarize, but I have zero experience in a courtroom, so my interpretation of events is pretty sketchy. When I got there, Nolo and the others asked who I was. I didn't know who was who, so I wasn't quite sure how to respond; "I'm from the internet" doesn't really sound appropriate. Told them I was from the "website", which seemed to work :-) Everybody was dressed very professionally and made it through street-level and court-level security successfully. It turned out to be fairly sparsely attended. Nolo had two others with him for legal support, and the feds had two guys. Nolo did all the talking for us, a short youngish guy spoke for DOJ. I think it was scheduled for about an hour, but it ran for 1:45, from 13:30 to 15:15. --snip-- I expected yelling and banging on tables during the hearing, but everybody was very congenial and just stated their points. Both legal teams chatted with each other outside the courtroom afterwards. Then our group, the legal team and observers, visited for a bit outside by the courthouse. Very interesting afternoon. I thought Nolo represented our side very well. Kicking myself for not buying some beers for Nolo afterwards. View Quote Thanks for the summary. This is good to see. |
|
Listen, this is important...
|
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronaldus Magnus
Come and find me... You won't like what you find. - AJ |
|
Originally Posted By Conju: Thank you. Did anyone from DOJ side show up to observe (individuals)? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By Conju: Originally Posted By Maroonfeather: Thank you. Did anyone from DOJ side show up to observe (individuals)? |
|
MYOB will be the death of our civil rights
|
Originally Posted By Conju: Thank you. Did anyone from DOJ side show up to observe (individuals)? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By Conju: Originally Posted By Maroonfeather: Thank you. Did anyone from DOJ side show up to observe (individuals)? |
|
|
Originally Posted By ARDestructo:
Thanks for the summary. This is good to see. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By ARDestructo:
Originally Posted By Maroonfeather:
Another attendee here. I'll try to summarize, but I have zero experience in a courtroom, so my interpretation of events is pretty sketchy. When I got there, Nolo and the others asked who I was. I didn't know who was who, so I wasn't quite sure how to respond; "I'm from the internet" doesn't really sound appropriate. Told them I was from the "website", which seemed to work :-) Everybody was dressed very professionally and made it through street-level and court-level security successfully. It turned out to be fairly sparsely attended. Nolo had two others with him for legal support, and the feds had two guys. Nolo did all the talking for us, a short youngish guy spoke for DOJ. I think it was scheduled for about an hour, but it ran for 1:45, from 13:30 to 15:15. --snip-- I expected yelling and banging on tables during the hearing, but everybody was very congenial and just stated their points. Both legal teams chatted with each other outside the courtroom afterwards. Then our group, the legal team and observers, visited for a bit outside by the courthouse. Very interesting afternoon. I thought Nolo represented our side very well. Kicking myself for not buying some beers for Nolo afterwards. Thanks for the summary. This is good to see. Definitely appreciated! |
|
Suck me sideways
FREE SHERMAN CWE2 Vet. What has been emesis'ed can not be unemesis'ed. |
|
Thanks for the update, I'm glad to finally see the wheels turning. And to see something relevant to the case vs the 87 pages of stupidity, back and forth arguments about what HK will do and what someone's definition of "is" is.
|
|
|
Great summary, thank you.
Any kind of read on the judge concerning the date redaction? If it was pre-86 I suspect the date would have been quite legible. |
|
Dan
Visit the ham radio forum http://www.ar15.com/forums/f_10/22_.html |
|
Proud member of Team Ranstad
Member of the National Rifle Association and the Texas State Rifle Association |
Nice job. Thanks for the summary. I'm still baffled by the circular logic of not common, BC we banned them, so the ban is ok since no one has them and no one is affected.
If they werent banned they would be commonly used for protection |
|
|
Originally Posted By NoloContendere:
She read most of the letter into the record View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By NoloContendere:
Originally Posted By danpass:
Great summary, thank you. Any kind of read on the judge concerning the date redaction? If it was pre-86 I suspect the date would have been quite legible. She read most of the letter into the record FAP |
|
Suck me sideways
FREE SHERMAN CWE2 Vet. What has been emesis'ed can not be unemesis'ed. |
Originally Posted By IHTFP08:
Nice job. Thanks for the summary. I'm still baffled by the circular logic of not common, BC we banned them, so the ban is ok since no one has them and no one is affected. If they werent banned they would be commonly used for protection View Quote I am hoping that the letter of intent from one of the Fed agencies looking to purchase M4 pattern select fire weapons for agents' "personal protection" gets into the record. |
|
Suck me sideways
FREE SHERMAN CWE2 Vet. What has been emesis'ed can not be unemesis'ed. |
Thanks for the summary.
|
|
The constitution is what the justices say it is, rather than what it's framers or you might say it is - FDR - May God judge him less violently than I would.
|
Originally Posted By NoloContendere:
She read most of the letter into the record View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By NoloContendere:
Originally Posted By danpass:
Great summary, thank you. Any kind of read on the judge concerning the date redaction? If it was pre-86 I suspect the date would have been quite legible. She read most of the letter into the record Is it your opinion/gut feeling she is setting you up for success? Laying the appropriate foundation .... |
|
Dan
Visit the ham radio forum http://www.ar15.com/forums/f_10/22_.html |
Originally Posted By danpass:
Is it your opinion/gut feeling she is setting you up for success? Laying the appropriate foundation .... View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By danpass:
Originally Posted By NoloContendere:
Originally Posted By danpass:
Great summary, thank you. Any kind of read on the judge concerning the date redaction? If it was pre-86 I suspect the date would have been quite legible. She read most of the letter into the record Is it your opinion/gut feeling she is setting you up for success? Laying the appropriate foundation .... I'm no expert, but it doesn't seem appropriate for an attorney to make a qualitative comment on a judge's presumed opinion. That seems like the sort of thing that has no positive and a large potential negative. |
|
"It's hard to hear a wallet screaming over the sound of a pecker cheering"
--WinstonSmith "If this is how the state treats its law-abiding citizens, it doesn't deserve to have any" --Solzhenitsyn |
Originally Posted By danpass:
Is it your opinion/gut feeling she is setting you up for success? Laying the appropriate foundation .... View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By danpass:
Originally Posted By NoloContendere:
Originally Posted By danpass:
Great summary, thank you. Any kind of read on the judge concerning the date redaction? If it was pre-86 I suspect the date would have been quite legible. She read most of the letter into the record Is it your opinion/gut feeling she is setting you up for success? Laying the appropriate foundation .... If history is any teacher, Nolo is going to leave that question be. He's said several times that until a decision is struck, it's anyone's guess. |
|
Originally Posted By HullBreach: Nah I bought a gun because stabbing people with bullets just doesn't carry the same message of "Get the fuck out of my house"
|
There is simply no way to tell how it will go. I specifically requested the court do an analysis of dangerous and unusual instead of just saying MGs are dangerous and unusual. The judge appeared receptive to that.
|
|
|
Originally Posted By NoloContendere:
She read most of the letter into the record View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By NoloContendere:
Originally Posted By danpass:
Great summary, thank you. Any kind of read on the judge concerning the date redaction? If it was pre-86 I suspect the date would have been quite legible. She read most of the letter into the record Isn't evidence provided by briefs already considered on record? |
|
|
Nolo and team, thanks again for giving this a shot. Also thanks to those that went in support today and represented the firearms community. |
|
When exposing a crime is treated as committing a crime, you are ruled by criminals.
|
Good job with that request NOLO! Thanks for all you are doing!
|
|
|
Originally Posted By NoloContendere: There is simply no way to tell how it will go. I specifically requested the court do an analysis of dangerous and unusual instead of just saying MGs are dangerous and unusual. The judge appeared receptive to that. View Quote |
|
"History is replete with the sound of silken slippers going downstairs and wooden shoes coming up." -Voltaire
|
The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Animal Farm-George Orwell. |
Originally Posted By Fugitive:
I've been trying to buy him beer for 3 years now. Finally got him to take A beer at CW4. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By Fugitive:
Kicking myself for not buying some beers for Nolo afterwards. I've been trying to buy him beer for 3 years now. Finally got him to take A beer at CW4. ETA: He's not stuck up just humble. |
|
The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Animal Farm-George Orwell. |
What's the next milestone?
|
|
Dan
Visit the ham radio forum http://www.ar15.com/forums/f_10/22_.html |
Dan
Visit the ham radio forum http://www.ar15.com/forums/f_10/22_.html |
Originally Posted By Fugitive: ETA: He's not stuck up just humble. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By Fugitive: Originally Posted By Fugitive: Kicking myself for not buying some beers for Nolo afterwards. I've been trying to buy him beer for 3 years now. Finally got him to take A beer at CW4. ETA: He's not stuck up just humble. |
|
"History is replete with the sound of silken slippers going downstairs and wooden shoes coming up." -Voltaire
|
Originally Posted By ARDestructo:
Thanks for the summary. This is good to see. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By ARDestructo:
Originally Posted By Maroonfeather:
Another attendee here. I'll try to summarize, but I have zero experience in a courtroom, so my interpretation of events is pretty sketchy. When I got there, Nolo and the others asked who I was. I didn't know who was who, so I wasn't quite sure how to respond; "I'm from the internet" doesn't really sound appropriate. Told them I was from the "website", which seemed to work :-) Everybody was dressed very professionally and made it through street-level and court-level security successfully. It turned out to be fairly sparsely attended. Nolo had two others with him for legal support, and the feds had two guys. Nolo did all the talking for us, a short youngish guy spoke for DOJ. I think it was scheduled for about an hour, but it ran for 1:45, from 13:30 to 15:15. --snip-- I expected yelling and banging on tables during the hearing, but everybody was very congenial and just stated their points. Both legal teams chatted with each other outside the courtroom afterwards. Then our group, the legal team and observers, visited for a bit outside by the courthouse. Very interesting afternoon. I thought Nolo represented our side very well. Kicking myself for not buying some beers for Nolo afterwards. Thanks for the summary. This is good to see. |
|
NRA Life member
NAHC Trophy Life Member ARFCOM Life member Teener Crew Life Member - They hate us cuz' they ain't us. |
|
Originally Posted By Grendel-OK:
This IS the next milestone. Now we wait and see. Hopefully we'll hear something on the PA case...soon? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By Grendel-OK:
Originally Posted By danpass:
What's the next milestone? This IS the next milestone. Now we wait and see. Hopefully we'll hear something on the PA case...soon? oh. someone was making a big stink earlier that this was simply about dismissing/not dismissing the case |
|
Dan
Visit the ham radio forum http://www.ar15.com/forums/f_10/22_.html |
Thanks for the summery Maroonfeather, everyone just chill out and let things work because there's nothing that Nolo can say at this point that hasn't already been said. Thanks again for taking this on Nolo and again my gratitude goes out to the plaintiffs as well!
|
|
|
Originally Posted By danpass:
oh. someone was making a big stink earlier that this was simply about dismissing/not dismissing the case View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By danpass:
Originally Posted By Grendel-OK:
Originally Posted By danpass:
What's the next milestone? This IS the next milestone. Now we wait and see. Hopefully we'll hear something on the PA case...soon? oh. someone was making a big stink earlier that this was simply about dismissing/not dismissing the case They were correct. Accept the fact that small victories are big when one considers the context of this fight. The government wanted the judge to dismiss the case. The judge didn't do so. That is in our favor. Small victories. The odds of us winning are still tiny, but they are enormous compared to any other case I can recall in the past 20 years that opposed 922(o) or the NFA at large. |
|
You would have to be daft to attack Tennessee - Aimless
RIP tnsparky Remember Jeff Reed |
Originally Posted By Fugitive:
I've been trying to buy him beer for 3 years now. Finally got him to take A beer at CW4. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By Fugitive:
Kicking myself for not buying some beers for Nolo afterwards. I've been trying to buy him beer for 3 years now. Finally got him to take A beer at CW4. Fattyfat bought me and Alan dinner. It was very generous of him. I am glad that the arfommers that showed up were very professional and very nice. We argued past one of the judges docket calls and I turned around the gallery was full of attorneys for the criminal docket. I thought, damn, when did they come in? Lol. Timeframe can really be anything. I've waited up to a year and a half for a ruling, I doubt this court will take that long, but it can truly be a while. So, now we wait and see what happens. I'm working another case on nonviolent felon dispossession that will be quite fun as well. Not filed yet, though. |
|
|
Originally Posted By Undefined: The odds of us winning are still tiny, but they are enormous compared to any other case I can recall in the past 20 years that opposed 922(o) or the NFA at large. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes |
|
"History is replete with the sound of silken slippers going downstairs and wooden shoes coming up." -Voltaire
|
Originally Posted By NoloContendere:
Fattyfat bought me and Alan dinner. It was very generous of him. I am glad that the arfommers that showed up were very professional and very nice. We argued past one of the judges docket calls and I turned around the gallery was full of attorneys for the criminal docket. I thought, damn, when did they come in? Lol. Timeframe can really be anything. I've waited up to a year and a half for a ruling, I doubt this court will take that long, but it can truly be a while. So, now we wait and see what happens. I'm working another case on nonviolent felon dispossession that will be quite fun as well. Not filed yet, though. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By NoloContendere:
Originally Posted By Fugitive:
Kicking myself for not buying some beers for Nolo afterwards. I've been trying to buy him beer for 3 years now. Finally got him to take A beer at CW4. Fattyfat bought me and Alan dinner. It was very generous of him. I am glad that the arfommers that showed up were very professional and very nice. We argued past one of the judges docket calls and I turned around the gallery was full of attorneys for the criminal docket. I thought, damn, when did they come in? Lol. Timeframe can really be anything. I've waited up to a year and a half for a ruling, I doubt this court will take that long, but it can truly be a while. So, now we wait and see what happens. I'm working another case on nonviolent felon dispossession that will be quite fun as well. Not filed yet, though. Depending on which aspects of the argument you wish to measure, we've waited between 29 and 81 years.... May the next blogger or so called gun rights advocate that claims these cases are being brought at the wrong time or we are pushing for too much too fast choke on their own bile. We've waited for decades. Anyone who thinks it isn't the right time to demand our rights probably thinks the 1960s were too soon for African Americans to demand their rights, or that women's suffrage should still be on the distant horizon rather than an indisputable reality. Too many second amendment supporters have died waiting. |
|
You would have to be daft to attack Tennessee - Aimless
RIP tnsparky Remember Jeff Reed |
Originally Posted By NoloContendere:
Fattyfat bought me and Alan dinner. It was very generous of him. I am glad that the arfommers that showed up were very professional and very nice. We argued past one of the judges docket calls and I turned around the gallery was full of attorneys for the criminal docket. I thought, damn, when did they come in? Lol. Timeframe can really be anything. I've waited up to a year and a half for a ruling, I doubt this court will take that long, but it can truly be a while. So, now we wait and see what happens. I'm working another case on nonviolent felon dispossession that will be quite fun as well. Not filed yet, though. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By NoloContendere:
Originally Posted By Fugitive:
Kicking myself for not buying some beers for Nolo afterwards. I've been trying to buy him beer for 3 years now. Finally got him to take A beer at CW4. Fattyfat bought me and Alan dinner. It was very generous of him. I am glad that the arfommers that showed up were very professional and very nice. We argued past one of the judges docket calls and I turned around the gallery was full of attorneys for the criminal docket. I thought, damn, when did they come in? Lol. Timeframe can really be anything. I've waited up to a year and a half for a ruling, I doubt this court will take that long, but it can truly be a while. So, now we wait and see what happens. I'm working another case on nonviolent felon dispossession that will be quite fun as well. Not filed yet, though. ah, I see. Since it was not dismissed it is now something she researches, compares, whatever and then rules on. I was thinking jury trial and stuff lol |
|
Dan
Visit the ham radio forum http://www.ar15.com/forums/f_10/22_.html |
"All compromise is based on give and take, but there can be no give and take on fundamentals. Any compromise on mere fundamentals is a surrender. For it is all give and no take." -Ghandi
|
If the Judge mentioned that she was not familiar with NFA stuff, do you think she would research some of the statements from today herself or wait for other hearings and filings to gather facts from the official court documents?
If she researches herself, there is a very good chance she could wind up reading this thread. I suggest everyone be on their best behavior. |
|
Originally posted by DK-Prof: lol
Hotty Toddy!! |
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.