Temporary Restaining Order Issued For Concealed Carry Improvement Act (merged thread)

Carlos Hathcock

Carlos Hathcock

.450/400 Nitro Ex
Messages
13,067
Reaction score
28,137
Location
Buffalo NY
New York Attorney General Letitia James had sought to remove Sinatra from the case. She filed a motion Wednesday evening asking that the judge, who is also overseeing two other constitutional challenges to the CCIA, be reassigned

In her motion, James charged that Hardaway and the other plaintiffs in the case were seeking a tactical advantage, sometimes called “judge shopping”, by having the case directed to Sinatra, an appointee of former President Donald Trump.



Fat whore. Just another example of not liking how the game is going so let's just change the rules.
 
Deplorable Me

Deplorable Me

.700 Nitro Express
Messages
24,557
Reaction score
48,134
Location
Western Front; Occupied NY
Carlos Hathcock said:
New York Attorney General Letitia James had sought to remove Sinatra from the case. She filed a motion Wednesday evening asking that the judge, who is also overseeing two other constitutional challenges to the CCIA, be reassigned

In her motion, James charged that Hardaway and the other plaintiffs in the case were seeking a tactical advantage, sometimes called “judge shopping”, by having the case directed to Sinatra, an appointee of former President Donald Trump.



Fat whore. Just another example of not liking how the game is going so let's just change the rules.
Click to expand...
So she's accusing the plaintiffs of judge shopping by judge shopping herself....
 
Deplorable Me

Deplorable Me

.700 Nitro Express
Messages
24,557
Reaction score
48,134
Location
Western Front; Occupied NY
US RIFLE M1A said:
When comparing this quick and difinive ruling by Judge Sinatra to the case before Judge Suddaby, consider that Judge Sinatra was ruling on case that was extremely limited in scope in comparison. The 'carry in church' elements of the Antonyuk et al (Suddaby) case took up one page of the 65 page rebuttal that was just filed by plaintiffs.

IMO it would have been more prudent for the Pro 2A community to bring a series of lawsuits, each one challenging one or two elements, than to bring one huge case (Antonyuk) all at once.
Click to expand...
How are the cases funded by the plaintiffs? That seems to be the issue. We have limited resources and the state has our money and everyone else's. Until the state is held financially liable for civil rights violations it's going to be an uphill battle.
 
US RIFLE M1A

US RIFLE M1A

.45 acp
Messages
362
Reaction score
891
Location
PA/NY Border in NEPA
For better or worse, the presumption is that in assigning multiple related cases, the court seeks to 'minimize the duplication of judicial effort.' Of you are assigned a judge who is sympathetic to your constitutional reasoning, you (and similar plaintiffs) are in for a good run.

My favorite quote from Judge Sinatra is roughly as follows; 'A seven week old law is not the status quo. The Constitution is.'
 
Saltwater60

Saltwater60

20×102mm Vulcan
Messages
35,366
Reaction score
39,772
Location
Western NY
US RIFLE M1A said:
When comparing this quick and difinive ruling by Judge Sinatra to the case before Judge Suddaby, consider that Judge Sinatra was ruling on case that was extremely limited in scope in comparison. The 'carry in church' elements of the Antonyuk et al (Suddaby) case took up one page of the 65 page rebuttal that was just filed by plaintiffs.

IMO it would have been more prudent for the Pro 2A community to bring a series of lawsuits, each one challenging one or two elements, than to bring one huge case (Antonyuk) all at once.
Click to expand...
I think Sinatra has balls and doesn’t care what the AG’s office thinks. That’s pretty clear in his back and forth with the dickhead from the AG’s office. I think Sinatra is a cut or two above Suddaby. Suddaby is an all talk no action judge to this point and Sinatra is a I’m not going to talk about it I’m going to take action judge. Sinatra is an action judge but not an activist judge.
 
Acer-m14

Acer-m14

20×102mm Vulcan
Messages
35,885
Reaction score
38,445
Location
Livingston
Dr. Evil said:
56 pages? Does anyone have a video that sums it up? ;) :ROFL:
Click to expand...

i bet its 28 pages on how the USA after the Civil War passed gun control law on the freed slaves so that can't have them ..

and 28 pages of back in the 1800's laws were passed where people of certain religions were not allowed to have guns ..

that would be NYS Reply ..
 
redtail

redtail

.308 Win
Messages
3,326
Reaction score
5,844
Location
PRNY
Acer-m14 said:
i bet its 28 pages on how the USA after the Civil War passed gun control law on the freed slaves so that can't have them ..

and 28 pages of back in the 1800's laws were passed where people of certain religions were not allowed to have guns ..

that would be NYS Reply ..
Click to expand...
You do realize the state is the defendant, no ?

I thought the table of contents on page two was a good summary of the plaintiff’s replies. :shrugs:
 
VietnamEraVet

VietnamEraVet

.308 Win
U.S. Military
Messages
4,224
Reaction score
8,913
Location
Ex WNY as of 08/2018. Screw FUAC & FUKH too!
redtail said:
You do realize the state is the defendant, no ?

I thought the table of contents on page two was a good summary of the plaintiff’s replies. :shrugs:
Click to expand...
I took the time to read the entire reply by the plaintiffs. IMHO, they have very clearly and concisely ripped NYS (the defendants) a new asshole.

The problem is, - I am not a lawyer! Although I think it is crystal clear why most if not all of the CCIA is Unconstitutional, there is just too much at risk here from NY's perspective. I would not be at all shocked to find out that NY is putting pressure behind the scenes on Judge Suddaby. And if that fails, then their fallback is that the 2nd Circuit will completely ignore Bruen, and the evidence and arguments before them in order to rule against us.

They are just die hard anti 2A douchebags who will stop at nothing.
 
Last edited:
C3D

C3D

.338 Win Mag
Messages
5,124
Reaction score
9,410
Location
Behind Enemy Lines
What is most outrageous about this whole CCIA thing is that we are now at the 8 week mark and a facially unconstitutional law still stands on the books. I would say the Federal court system is a big disappointment but this is what I expected, so I will say it is unsatisfactory.
 
Grimscale

Grimscale

.338 Win Mag
Messages
7,862
Reaction score
15,361
Location
Rochester
C3D said:
What is most outrageous about this whole CCIA thing is that we are now at the 8 week mark and a facially unconstitutional law still stands on the books. I would say the Federal court system is a big disappointment but this is what I expected, so I will say it is unsatisfactory.
Click to expand...
So what you're saying is the "soap box" and the "jury box" have come up empty.
And others here are saying the "voting box" is useless.


Hmm... wonder what box is left.
 
VietnamEraVet

VietnamEraVet

.308 Win
U.S. Military
Messages
4,224
Reaction score
8,913
Location
Ex WNY as of 08/2018. Screw FUAC & FUKH too!
Today @ 10 AM is a hearing in Judge Suddaby's court in Syracuse re granting a Preliminary Injunction on Antonyuk v Bruen (now Nigrelli?).

Anyone going? It would be nice to get a report on the proceedings and whether it is a shit show or not.
 
Last edited:
G

Glock_USA

.45 acp
Messages
379
Reaction score
637
Location
NY
VietnamEraVet said:
Today @ 10 AM is a hearing in Judge Suddaby's court in Syracuse re granting a Preliminary Injunction on Antonyuk v Bruen (now Nigrelli?).

Anyone going? It would be nice to get a report on the proceedings and whether it is a shit show or not.
Click to expand...
I’m listening to it now.


Call in (audio only)
+1 315-691-0477
Phone Conference ID: 595 261 93#

I think the opening was weak. The atty said they won’t challenge Times Square and a handful of other places. Seems like they are backing off and just gonna try for a few places right now.
They also cited that California requires less hours of training. Trying to get it knocked down to fewer hours but not eliminating it. Pretty disappointed. Seems like they watered down their challenges.
 
Last edited:
A

arp228

.38 Special
Messages
41
Reaction score
90
Location
Long Island
Glock_USA said:
I’m listening to it now.


Call in (audio only)
+1 315-691-0477
Phone Conference ID: 595 261 93#

I think the opening was weak. The atty said they won’t challenge Times Square and a handful of other places. Seems like they are backing off and just gonna try for a few places right now.
They also cited that California requires less hours of training. Trying to get it knocked down to fewer hours but not eliminating it. Pretty disappointed. Seems like they watered down their challenges.
Click to expand...
Besides Times Square, do you remember what other places they said they will not challenge?
 
Saltwater60

Saltwater60

20×102mm Vulcan
Messages
35,366
Reaction score
39,772
Location
Western NY
Glock_USA said:
I’m listening to it now.


Call in (audio only)
+1 315-691-0477
Phone Conference ID: 595 261 93#

I think the opening was weak. The atty said they won’t challenge Times Square and a handful of other places. Seems like they are backing off and just gonna try for a few places right now.
They also cited that California requires less hours of training. Trying to get it knocked down to fewer hours but not eliminating it. Pretty disappointed. Seems like they watered down their challenges.
Click to expand...
So you’re saying the plaintiffs are backing off on sensitive and restricted places? Sure is disappointing if that’s what you’re saying. Unfortunately they will take a small win and move on o fear because so much going on and so much money being spent.
 
Dr. Evil

Dr. Evil

20×102mm Vulcan
Messages
37,799
Reaction score
81,479
Location
My Underground Lair
WTF is going on here? Why are they not putting their foot on the juggler vein? WTH happened to their case? If they are going to take the time and effort to sue why not go for it all?
 
Saltwater60

Saltwater60

20×102mm Vulcan
Messages
35,366
Reaction score
39,772
Location
Western NY
Glock_USA said:
Also lots of problems with standing. No injured party. Etc. not looking good. At all.
Click to expand...
Not directed at you but I’m sick of hearing no standing, no standing because anyone in NYS has standing. It’s a joke and Suddaby is bought and paid for.
I’ll also add what’s wrong with going for the gusto and having the judge restrict it? It’s not an all or nothing lawsuit right?
 
R

ROBBARTLEY

22lr
Messages
18
Reaction score
31
Location
Northern NY
I am very disappointed in the concession it appears GOA is making. Disgusted actually! Is this a matter of get a little now go for more after? There is a severability clause...why the hell would they not as for a ruling on all? Are we dealing with "Standing" again? And request for another 3-day stay if injunction is granted...that spurred prompt review by the 2nd in the TRO!
 
Saltwater60

Saltwater60

20×102mm Vulcan
Messages
35,366
Reaction score
39,772
Location
Western NY
arp228 said:
Why would they back off on restaurants where alcohol is sold? Don't they go out to eat? This is nuts
Click to expand...
Considering nearly all restaurants sell alcohol. I said it all along we’d get fucked, I just didn’t think it would be by the people we paid.
Unless there is a good reason for this I will ignore their donation requests until they do something good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top