B&L Productions v. Newsom

[John Kloehr]

Full name is "B&L Productions, Inc., dba Crossroads of the West, et al., Petitioners v.  Gavin Newsom, Governor of California, et al." This is a gun show promotor challenging the California ban on making sales at gun shows on government property. Shows are still allowed, just no selling guns, ammo, or parts. All can be advertised for sale a shown, just can't close a sale. Have to leave and then contact the seller separately... The case is framed as a 1st Amendment case, as the government is restricting "disfavored speech."

 

This case is now scheduled for SCOTUS conference on the 25th, SCOTUS case page with filings:

 

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/24-598.html

 

On a separate (lack of) update, Snope and Ocean State are still not scheduled for the next conference.

Edited April 11 by John Kloehr

[Blackwater 53393]

That would be Friday, the 25th of April if I read correctly.  This, Ocean State, and Snope have been repeatedly rescheduled for conference.  It seems more doubtful that they, (any of the three) will actually be dealt with in the current session.

[John Kloehr]

I do see B&L was in one conference back in January, however the requested responses were not returned by then. Now all parties have responded so this is the first conference to have more than the district and circuit record to consider.

[Subdeacon Joe]

SCOTUS  will sit on its hands.  Again.   

 

I wish SCOTUS could just gather them all up and say,  "Look, guys,  the Bill of Rights removed the rights to keep and bear arms from the political table in 1791.  The Court again made that clear in 1943. See: The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections."

: Robert H. Jackson, US Supreme Court Justice West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943).  

 

So STOP IT!"

[John Kloehr]

3 hours ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

SCOTUS  will sit on its hands.  Again.   

 

I wish SCOTUS could just gather them all up and say...

One of my speculations is SCOTUS waiting for more appeals for cert on a bunch of other cases which will come up soon so a hammer can be put down on a bunch of courts at the same time, which does likely mean it will take another year. May not be sitting on its hands so much as getting tired of all the new end runs. Just off the top of my head:

• Certain arms are not covered by the 2nd as they are weapons of war ignoring McDonald
• Certain things are accessories and not covered as "accoutrements" are not protected
• Bruen establishing a "new" two part test, when it ruled the old 2-part test was one step too many and was actually reiterating Heller
• Core protection is for self defense, not all lawful purposes
• "The People" has a different meaning when applying the 2nd
• A nuanced approach or technological innovation bypasses the "new" "2-part test"
• "Use" in self defense requires a history of shots fired in events, not simply a person selecting an arm for a purpose

 

Edited April 13 by John Kloehr

[Subdeacon Joe]

30 minutes ago, John Kloehr said:

One of my speculations is SCOTUS waiting for more appeals for cert on a bunch of other cases which will come up soon so a hammer can be put down on a bunch of courts at the same time, which does likely mean it will take another year. May not be sitting on its hands so much as getting tired of all the new end runs.

 

I had thought of that,  but Demeter on a Combine!, how many dozen do they want?