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

[US RIFLE M1A]

There is a series of Reddit posts from someone who was actually there. Defense fielded a team of lawyers, some of whom were there solely to enable the speaker to not skip a beat when looking up supporting material. Plaintiff attorney was on his own, and the audio made him seem like he was stumbling when he was going back to his files to find supporting information.

Judges are used to lawyers who are overwhelmed during the actual hearing/trial. I have seen situations in which the side which was represented in good faith by good lawyers standing up for a good person seem to fall apart right there in court.

And the judge ruled entirely in their favor.

Several times.

 

[redtail]

You guys need to take a breath ,& ease up on eating our own .
The attorneys for GOA are very good and have been practicing ; and winning 2A cases for a long time.

Just read this quote directly from our side's lawyer on another forum ,

"We did not concede restaurant carry. We said we weren’t asking him to approve of drunk carry or stoned carry. We didn’t challenge cannabis places but we assuredly challenged restaurant carry. 100%."

 

[VietnamEraVet]

There is a series of Reddit posts from someone who was actually there. Defense fielded a team of lawyers, some of whom were there solely to enable the speaker to not skip a beat when looking up supporting material. Plaintiff attorney was on his own, and the audio made him seem like he was stumbling when he was going back to his files to find supporting information.

Judges are used to lawyers who are overwhelmed during the actual hearing/trial. I have seen situations in which the side which was represented in good faith by good lawyers standing up for a good person seem to fall apart right there in court.

And the judge ruled entirely in their favor.

Several times.

Obviously, we shall see when a decision is rendered. What I will say however, - after having read the various pleadings, is that while I was very happy with the latest written response from our side, - from what I heard Atty. Stambouleih argue in court today, it seemed like two different things entirely. It seemed like he has not even arguing the points we raised in the suit. He sounded very nervous and not at all organized in his arguments.

In my career, I have had to learn to speak confidently in front of groups, - some who were in fact somewhat hostile to my topic / arguments. IMHO, he needs to go back and learn to be a better speaker. I didn't get to hear all of it, but what I did hear was very disheartening to listen to.

Which begs the question, - is it possible to listen to a recording of the whole proceeding? Anybody know, or have access to a recording of it?

 

[maverick52]

You guys need to take a breath ,& ease up on eating our own .
The attorneys for GOA are very good and have been practicing ; and winning 2A cases for a long time.

Just read this quote directly from our side's lawyer on another forum ,

"We did not concede restaurant carry. We said we weren’t asking him to approve of drunk carry or stoned carry. We didn’t challenge cannabis places but we assuredly challenged restaurant carry. 100%."

What forum?

 

[cranberry]

What forum?

AR15.com hometown forum .

 

[maverick52]

AR15.com hometown forum .

Link to discussion?

 

[cranberry]

Link to discussion

Link to discussion?

I just told you where to go .

 

[US RIFLE M1A]

Look at the number of lawyers on each side. I count at least a 7 to 1 ratio.

Also, an immediate transcript request usually means that they want to get going on an appeal or stay in a higher court.

Oct 25, 2022

TEXT Minute Entry for proceedings held before U.S. District Judge Glenn T. Suddaby: Motion Hearing held on 10/25/2022 re Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Ivan Antonyuk, Corey Johnson, Leslie Leman, Joseph Mann, Lawrence Sloane, Alfred Terrille. Motion returnable before Judge Glenn T. Suddaby filed by Alfred Terrille, Ivan Antonyuk, Lawrence Sloane, Joseph Mann, Leslie Leman, and Corey Johnson. Oral argument is heard from counsel. Judge Suddaby RESERVES DECISION. A written decision will be forthcoming. Time: 10:05 AM - 12:51 PM. Appearances: Stephen Stamboulieh, Esq. for Plaintiffs. James Thompson, AAG and Alexandria Twinem, Assistant Solicitor General, for Defendants Hochul and Bruen (New York State). John Heisler, Jr., Esq. for Defendants Doran, Fitpatrick, and Conway (Onondaga County). Todd Long, Esq., Danielle Smith, Esq., and Darrien Balin, Esq. for Defendant Cecile (City of Syracuse). Edward Melvin, Esq. for Defendants Oakes and Hilton (Oswego County). Court Reporter : Jodi Hibbard. (sal )


Oct 25, 2022

TRANSCRIPT REQUEST by Kevin P. Bruen, Judge Matthew J. Doran, Kathleen Hochul for proceedings held on October 25, 2022 before Judge Glenn T. Suddaby.. (Thompson, James) (Entered: 10/25/2022)

 

[US RIFLE M1A]

AR15.com hometown forum .

I don't know who NoloContendere is, but he refers to the plaintiffs as 'we.'

 

[US RIFLE M1A]

The actual plaintiff's attorney is on Reddit as 2ALititigator. He makes some excellent points that he was instructed by the judge NOT to go over territory already covered. That's why he did not seem on point, he was told not to be. Only new stuff.

Others who were there say that defense got smacked down by the judge on numerous occasions.

 

[Dr. Evil]

 

[Saltwater60]

There is a series of Reddit posts from someone who was actually there. Defense fielded a team of lawyers, some of whom were there solely to enable the speaker to not skip a beat when looking up supporting material. Plaintiff attorney was on his own, and the audio made him seem like he was stumbling when he was going back to his files to find supporting information.

Judges are used to lawyers who are overwhelmed during the actual hearing/trial. I have seen situations in which the side which was represented in good faith by good lawyers standing up for a good person seem to fall apart right there in court.

And the judge ruled entirely in their favor.

Several times.

That’s all well and good but why did they back off? That’s why I’m mad.

 

[cranberry]

Really not sure why your jumping to conclusions about the plaintiff's attorney and bad mouthing GOA and demanding your donated money back the judge is going to give his decision soon even if it is a good decision for us the state will appeal it and the case will drag on for at least a year so chill out .

 

[cranberry]

That’s all well and good but why did they back off? That’s why I’m mad.

He didn't back off of anything judge told him not to bring up past business that he only wanted to hear new business .

 

[Dr. Evil]

Really not sure why your jumping to conclusions about the plaintiff's attorney and bad mouthing GOA and demanding your donated money back the judge is going to give his decision soon even if it is a good decision for us the state will appeal it and the case will drag on for at least a year so chill out .

I am merely saying with my post is that this whole thing is a fucking game. I was also basing my comments on what others have heard while listening to the game playing out. I am also venting as I sometimes do as to the insanity we all have been dealing with. I will happily apologize and donate more money if it goes the way you seem to think it will. My patience tank is running on fumes.

 

[VietnamEraVet]

He didn't back off of anything judge told him not to bring up past business that he only wanted to hear new business .

When and where did the judge convey that to Atty. Stambouleigh?

 

[Saltwater60]

He didn't back off of anything judge told him not to bring up past business that he only wanted to hear new business .

Then what was the point to this hearing? The judge already said all of this was unconstitutional so the only thing that would need to be addressed is standing or how it applies to all of us. I admittedly didn’t listen to the hearing but it sounds like from posts above the dropped some of the sensitive or restricted places arguments? I could be wrong.

 

[maverick52]

Let’s all take a breather and see how he rules on the PI. This is just the PI. We still have the actual lawsuit and twenty others behind it. It’s gonna be a long haul. Don’t expect any easy victory. We are fighting the state and they have endless resources. If Suddaby chokes we can hope for better judges down the line.

 

[Acer-m14]

Also lots of problems with standing. No injured party. Etc. not looking good. At all.

lack of standing .. no shit .... I'm in a wheel chair and can't stand your highness ..

 

[Acer-m14]

Sounds like for standing they are looking for people to have been arrested and charged first. Or denied a permit.

Kind of like telling a stalking victim we can't do anything unless your stalker kills you.

if only the dead could file charges ..

N.J. gun association calls Berlin woman's death an 'absolute outrage'

When Carol Bowne was fatally stabbed by an ex-boyfriend late Wednesday night just outside her Berlin home, she had been waiting since mid April. Although she had filed a restraining order against suspect Michael Eitel, 45, the man attacked her shortly after 10 p.m. upon Bowne's arrival at her...

www.nj.com

 

[Acer-m14]

games people play .. this song did you mean ?

 

[Glock_USA]

Then what was the point to this hearing? The judge already said all of this was unconstitutional so the only thing that would need to be addressed is standing or how it applies to all of us. I admittedly didn’t listen to the hearing but it sounds like from posts above the dropped some of the sensitive or restricted places arguments? I could be wrong.

I remember the lawyer for the state even being surprised that we were no longer challenging some of the places. He said "oh I wasn't aware you were not challenging these places any longer, well then I'll move on"
I'm not a lawyer but that seems pretty clear cut to me.

 

[Saltwater60]

I remember the lawyer for the state even being surprised that we were no longer challenging some of the places. He said "oh I wasn't aware you were not challenging these places any longer, well then I'll move on"
I'm not a lawyer but that seems pretty clear cut to me.

And that right there is my problem with this!! Thanks for confirming. That’s why I’m pissed. Suddaby already said the whole thing is essentially unconstitutional so why give up in part now? Now Suddaby can’t side with us on the dropped challenges if he was going to, but could have sided with us or the state if we continued to challenge all restrictive places. It doesn’t really make sense to me.

 

[Truebeliever]

Let’s all take a breather and see how he rules on the PI. This is just the PI. We still have the actual lawsuit and twenty others behind it. It’s gonna be a long haul. Don’t expect any easy victory. We are fighting the state and they have endless resources. If Suddaby chokes we can hope for better judges down the line.

Exactly. How many times has SCOTUS questioned one side hard but only to find out that SCOTUS decided in their favor.
We have to wait for the decision to know.

 

[maverick52]

I think the issue here is going for the whole thing. It may be that GOA is using a piecemeal strategy. I mean look at the house of worship lawsuit. TRO by Sinatra done. I think if the lawsuits becomes more specific to certain aspects of the law we can chip away at it. I agree that it’s all bullshit. But given the circumstances it may be our best play.

 

[Glock_USA]

And that right there is my problem with this!! Thanks for confirming. That’s why I’m pissed. Suddaby already said the whole thing is essentially unconstitutional so why give up on part now? Now Suddaby can’t side with us on them if he was going to, but could have sided with us or the state if we continued to challenge all restrictive places.

Yea I don't really know what to make of it. I was listening in the background and didn't think too much when they gave up shelters and camps and places with children, then my ears perked up when they also gave up on places that sell alcohol and healthcare centers and public transportation. I just can't understand it. Maybe what I heard was out of context or something but I just can't imagine how it was. Also they had big problems with standing on the transportation one. They argued their church van was public transit which it isn't, and the state pointed that out, and one of the other guys was going for airports but the state showed that he didn't even have a ticket to fly anywhere so no standing there either.

 

[Glock_USA]

I think the issue here is going for the whole thing. It may be that GOA is using a piecemeal strategy. I mean look at the house of worship lawsuit. TRO by Sinatra done. I think if the lawsuits becomes more specific to certain aspects of the law we can chip away at it. I agree that it’s all bullshit. But given the circumstances it may be our best play.

But why give up on places where you already won a TRO and the judge already cited no historical tradition for? Seemed like a slam dunk.

 

[maverick52]

But why give up on places where you already won a TRO and the judge already cited no historical tradition for? Seemed like a slam dunk.

I don’t know. I’m just guessing on their strategy. I do think Suddaby has been inconsistent which has GOA re-working their approach.

 

[Glock_USA]

A few more things that popped into my head from the call, our lawyer seemed very unprepared. I specifically remember:

He was asked how many instances in history would he consider enough to create a historical tradition when talking about laws. He said he didn't know. Just said more than a few. I think he should have been prepared with an answer. There has to be a standard. 1 or 2 ordinances in a territorial location that affected .07% of the population shouldn't cut it.

He was speaking about giving up one right to exercise another. He tried to cite SCOTUS but couldn't. He gave up and just said "they don't like it".

On the other side, the sate got yelled at by the judge for claiming the other states who have shall issue permit processes are all constitutional. The judge said they didn't say that. The states lawyer tried to twist their words and gout caught. Just because SCOTUS didn't say they weren't unconstitutional doesn't mean they called them constitutional.

The state pretty much said something along the lines of the law isn't being enforced so nobody has standing to challenge it. The issue is when they do enforce it on a career criminal and the charges stick they will have precedent to keep charging everyone else in the future.

They spoke a lot about "when we get into discovery" so I guess this is gong to be ongoing?


I'll post more if/when any more of it comes back to me.

 

[Dr. Evil]

Second response from GOA:

Thank you for contacting Gun Owners of America (GOA).

In an article published by GOA on 10/07/2022 titled "Victory: Federal Judge Blocks Extreme Gun Control Law," GOA acknowledges the dangers of recent New York laws.

"Here are the provisions of the law that are blocked under the temporary restraining order secured by Gun Owners Foundation:

1). Requiring businesses to openly state they ALLOW concealed carry
2). Disclosing one’s social media accounts for review
3). Prohibitions on carrying in most so-called “sensitive places,” including doctor’s offices, Times Square, restaurants and places of entertainment, and on public transportation
4). In-person interviews with law enforcement

To read this article in it's entirety, please visit our website at www.gunowners.org/na10072022/

GOA's legal team has been fighting in court this week against the gun control in New York.

I hope this helps. If I can further assist you, please let me know.

Thank you again for contacting GOA and for your support of the Second Amendment.