NEW: Fischer v. Remington (S.D. OH): Federal judge orders man to pay Hornady $3,600 after falsely claiming that his rifle contained the company's ammo when it exploded, when it was actually using handloaded ammo from 1993. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Mr. Shope sent a letter to the court last May after learning that Hornady wanted sanctions against him, where he said that the company "was kinda nasty with me" and that "it wasn't a deliberate lie or my grandson would have won, not lost."
And if you're wondering why the plaintiff wasn't at this hearing, it's because he already signed a settlement with Hornady where *he pays the company* $30,000: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Update: The judge says that he "abused the judicial process by deliberately misrepresenting facts essential to the case throughout its lifespan, ultimately causing the Defendant to incur significant legal costs." storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
NYSRPA v. Bruen (#SCOTUS, 20-843): Reply brief for petitioners
"The state now retreats to the equally indefensible claims that the right vanishes in 'populous areas' and extends only to those with a 'non-speculative need' to exercise it." supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/2…
"When the state is not rewriting the historical record, it is attacking arguments petitioners did not make, while defending a law it did not pass and licenses it did not issue."
"The Court should reverse the decision below and hold that petitioners have a right to do what even the state now concedes the Constitution protects: bear arms outside the home for self-defense."
"What really propels the plaintiffs’ view that Congress is constitutionally foreclosed from eliminating or curtailing the SALT deduction is their position that, until 2017, Congress had never done so. We disagree that the Constitution imposes such a constraint on Congress."
"And while they argue that the SALT deduction lowers 'the effective cost of state and local taxes,' they point us to nothing that compels the federal Government to protect taxpayers from the true costs of paying their state and local taxes."
"In fact, the history of the deduction helps the Plaintiff States virtually not at all."
Judge Benitez: "Well, that's -- that's -- that's the problem. Is that, you know, California's got so many laws and -- you basically have to have a lawyer at your hip in order to know whether when you are handling a firearm you're violating the law and committing a felony."
Benitez said during the Miller trial that "it dawned on [him] that the statute that bans this type of weapon actually discriminates against people of lower income," and they're good to use on the coyotes that are taking out his chickens.
Benitez asks California if there's a better source for the availability of banned-in-CA guns in other states than the companies distributing them. California says a government agency. Benitez asks which one would have that data. California: 🤷♂️
"But there’s another major hole in the Kavanaugh conspiracy theory. None of its adherents seem to be able to explain why it would make any sense to bribe him." motherjones.com/politics/2021/…
"Why would anyone illegally funnel money to an individual federal appellate judge? To do what? Reverse an EPA regulation?"
"Dark money in judicial nominations has paid for ads and advocacy—not to help Brett Kavanaugh buy a house he couldn’t afford, in 2006... For that Kavanaugh conspiracy to hold up, someone would have had to have been playing a very long game with utterly unpredictable odds."
In case you were wondering, it looks like the law NYPD was accused of violating has a "but guns" exception, so they can continue using this allegedly discriminatory practice when deciding which New Yorkers have 2nd Amendment rights: codes.findlaw.com/ny/criminal-pr…