J&G Sales and NSSF File Suits against the BATF&E

I think the NRA does a great job of fighting the ideological war that is being waged - the battle for the hearts and minds of the average citizen. They do a great job of exposing the lies of the rabid gun control advocates. I think they do a great job politically - both during the legislative process and during elections.

But their lack of coordination with SAF is unfortunate.




.
 
Last edited:
In the NRA's misguided effort(s) to find relevance in a postHeller/McDonald world....."

I think the NRA-ILA does not subscribe to the idea that more can get done if you don't care who gets the credit. They want to be "the one" that wins big cases, rather that helping get cases won.

Rick
 
I think there are a few models for anti-gunners to follow.

For one, you can look at what anti-abortion / pro-life advocate eventually did even though they were handed a defeat in Roe v Wade. They nibbled around the edges until in some states, getting an abortion is so wrapped in regulations and rules that they've put up tremendous hurdles and disincentives for abortion.

There is a lot that municipalties and states can do to severly limit gun rights - as in New Jersey, certain parts of California, New York City...

I don't think we've seen where the courts are going to remedy those situations. Maybe Kwong, et al v. Bloomberg et al could set a positive precedent. It could also go against us - in which case "excessive" amounts of paperwork, forms, fees, processes and proceedures, long wait times - could only be fixed with legislation.
 
So, under the ruling, the ATF can demand anything so long as it's part of an "ongoing criminal investigation." In this case, the definition of "ongoing criminal investigation" is anything for which the ATF wants to gather information.

I wasn't really happy with the court's rather vague logic in getting around the part of 18 U.S.C. 923(g)(3)(B) that specifically and only mentions "pistols and revolvers."

Correct me if I'm foggy, but doesn't the Rehberg amendment cut off funding for this practice anyway?
 
Tom, the legislation kills funding for a nationwide reporting requirement. Not a region specific reporting requirement.

Yesterday, all plaintiffs have filed their notices of appeal to the DCCA.

01/13/2012 44 ORDER granting 24[RECAP] Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and denying 33 and 34 Plaintiffs' Motions for Summary Judgment. This case is closed. Signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer on 1/13/2012. (KD) (Entered: 01/13/2012)
01/16/2012 45 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 44 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment, by FOOTHILLS FIREARMS, LLC, J&G SALES, LTD.. Filing fee $ 455, receipt number 0090-2795437. Fee Status: Fee Paid. Parties have been notified. (Gardiner, Richard) (Entered: 01/16/2012)
01/16/2012 46 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 44 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment, 43[RECAP] Memorandum & Opinion by NATIONAL SHOOTING SPORTS FOUNDATION, INC.. Filing fee $ 455, receipt number 0090-2795460. Fee Status: Fee Paid. Parties have been notified. (Vogts, James) (Entered: 01/16/2012)
01/17/2012 47 Transmission of the Notice of Appeal, Order Appealed, and Docket Sheet to US Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals fee was paid this date re 45 Notice of Appeal. (rdj) (Entered: 01/17/2012)
01/17/2012 48 Transmission of the Notice of Appeal, Order Appealed, and Docket Sheet to US Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals fee was paid this date re 46 Notice of Appeal. (rdj) (Entered: 01/17/2012)
Click to expand...

As the NSSF has reported, if this ruling is upheld, the ATF will have carte blanc regulatory powers that the Congress has never authorized.
 
What a disaster.
I wish SAF had been involved, although I am not sure that is all NRAs direct action. From what happened in previous cases I think SAF probably wants to do their own thing(I would).
Hopefully good results on appeal.
 
First point: If you go back and actually read the initial complaints, you will see that the NSSF has the better case.

Second point: The NRA-ILA did not coordinate their D.C. case with the NSSF.

Third point: It was a strategic and tactical mistake for the NRA-ILA to file 3 separate, but identical, cases in three different jurisdictions. Only one of the three judges has not consolidated, and that judge is/was waiting to see what D.C. does.
 
We are still in preliminary stages with Natl Shooting Sports Found., et al v. B. Todd Jones (12-5009, 12-5010), as noted in the following circuit docket:

03/09/2012 Open Document MODIFIED PARTY FILER--MOTION filed [1362947] by Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence to participate as amicus curiae. [Disclosure Listing: Attached] [Service Date: 03/09/2012 ] [12-5009, 12-5010]--[Edited 03/09/2012 by LMC] (Reade, Steven)
03/13/2012 Open Document RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION FILED [1363534] by Foothills Firearms, LLC and J&G Sales, Ltd. to motion to participate as amicus curiae [1362947-2] [Service Date: 03/13/2012 by CM/ECF NDA] Pages: 1-10. [12-5009] (Gardiner, Richard)
03/20/2012 Open Document REPLY FILED [1364739] by The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in 12-5009, 12-5010 to response [1363534-2] [Service Date: 03/20/2012 by CM/ECF NDA] Pages: 1-10. [12-5009, 12-5010] (Reade, Steven)
Click to expand...

I haven't downloaded these briefs. I'll let them fight it (amicus will be granted).

The other thing that I noted is that the NRA is not the lead party to the case. the NSSF is the lead party. Having said this, it is the NRA attorneys that are objecting to the Brady Center becoming an amicus, not the NSSF.
 
Catching up to other things... Here's the latest docket entry:

06/28/2012 CLERK'S ORDER filed [1381173] setting briefing schedule: APPELLANT Brief due 08/10/2012. Appendix due 08/10/2012. APPELLEE Brief due on 09/10/2012. AMICUS for APPELLEE Brief due 09/25/2012. APPELLANT Reply Brief due 10/09/2012 [12-5009, 12-5010]

08/06/2012 ENTRY OF APPEARANCE filed [1387754] by Andrew A. Lothson on behalf of Appellee National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. in 12-5009, Appellant National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. in 12-5010. [12-5009, 12-5010] (Lothson, Andrew)

08/08/2012 APPELLANT BRIEF [1388271] filed by Foothills Firearms, LLC and J&G Sales, Ltd. [Service Date: 08/08/2012 ] Length of Brief: 13.985 words. [12-5009] (Gardiner, Richard)

08/09/2012 APPELLANT BRIEF [1388345] filed by National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. in 12-5010 [Service Date: 08/09/2012 ] Length of Brief: 9,247 Words. [12-5009, 12-5010] (Vogts, James)
Click to expand...

There were no amicus briefs for the Appellants/Plaintiffs. The opening briefs are attached.
 

Attachments

From the docket in NSSF v. Melson:

09/10/2012 Open Document APPELLEE BRIEF [1393664] filed by B. Todd Jones in 12-5009, 12-5010 [Service Date: 09/10/2012 ] Length of Brief: 10,192 words. [12-5009, 12-5010] (Raab, Michael)

09/17/2012 Open Document CLERK'S ORDER filed [1394832] granting motion to supplement [1393663-2]; the Clerk is directed to file appendix [1393661-2] [12-5009, 12-5010]

09/17/2012 PER ABOVE ORDER lodged appendix [1393661-2] is filed [12-5009, 12-5010]

09/25/2012 Open Document AMICUS FOR APPELLEE BRIEF [1396358] filed by The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in 12-5009, 12-5010 [Service Date: 09/25/2012 ] Length of Brief: 6,462 Words. [12-5009, 12-5010] (Reade, Steven)

10/09/2012 Open Document APPELLANT REPLY BRIEF [1398633] filed by National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. in 12-5010 [Service Date: 10/09/2012 ] Length of Brief: 3,398 words. [12-5009, 12-5010] (Vogts, James)

10/09/2012 Open Document APPELLANT REPLY BRIEF [1398640] filed by Foothills Firearms, LLC and J&G Sales, Ltd. [Service Date: 10/09/2012 ] Length of Brief: 6,909. [12-5009] (Gardiner, Richard)
Click to expand...

Attached are the briefs, except for the Brady brief. Quite frankly, they can not say anything we haven't already heard, time and time again. Not wasting my money on them.

Note: I have been "catching up" on many cases today, and haven't had time to read any of the briefs. Many of the entries in the 2A Cases thread have been updated and will continue to be updated as I get to them.
 

Attachments

I'm over a month late in reporting this.

Oral arguments have been scheduled.

11/07/2012 CLERK'S ORDER filed [1403704] scheduling oral argument before Judges HENDERSON, ROGERS, EDWARDS Wednesday, 01/09/2013 AM [12-5009, 12-5010]
Click to expand...
 
Al, you'll get by with a warning this time. Due to the hard work you're already doing around here keeping up on everything else.
At least we haven't missed them yet.
Do they post the recordings from this court?
 
Oral arguments are made available to the public, only after the case has closed. It costs about $30 bucks.

Orals are made available to the participating parties, but according to the D.C. Circuit website, only the attorneys may listen to them.

So the long and short of it is that No, we will not get to listen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top