5th Circuit panel essentially upholds VanDerStock frames and receivers vacature

[Racer X]

The DC's ruling will be redone to vacate only the 2 portions of the proposed rule that were challanged. But those are the only sections that matter.

So, a 3 judge apellate panel says it is completely outrageous, and compleely violates the APA, and bypasses Congress.

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fi...nDerStok_v_Garland_208_Opinion.pdf?1699567052

 

[NFrameFred]

Good read and important points. Gratifying to see the law actually applied and upheld as written.

The problem is we have "legislators" dumber than a bag of rocks promulgating and writing proposed laws with little or no knowledge of the subject of their ire other than emotional feelings. The dangerous, sad, and maddening part is, as Jefferson opined, we get the government we deserve. A dumbed down population, a semi-literate electorate "educated" by professional organizations abusing the trust and the assumed integrity of their calling that now seems fixated more on indoctrinating than educating is being led to their own subjugation into slavery.

The cat is and has long been out of the bag since people with selfish intentions finally achieved majority and convinced the sheep to vote themselves money from the public till. The two fold solution (an uphill battle to be sure and, in my opinion, a hopeless endeavor) is to elect people of real principle with an affection for and appreciation of the Constitution as written in plain English - not applying non-existent fanciful interpretations that the Founders never intended.

On the other hand, it is indeed encouraging that perhaps we see some restraint of runaway bureaucratic abuse still being attempted. The ignorant, biased and the outright evil will not give up their agenda. It remains for the upright and true to continue the good fight.

 

[zeke]

Am especially liking the parts about "changing the definition" and "plain language" !

 

[CAJUNLAWYER]

I had dealings with Kurt as a lawyer before he became Judge and have followed his career from afar. Nicest guy you could meet. He was David Vitter's friend and manager and snagged a Federal Judgeship shortly after David's election to senate. Thereafter he was subsequently promoted to the Fifth. He is a rock solid strict constructionist. He also hates government overreach. Read his opinions on the Katrina shootings and subsequent government trials. We are in good hands in the Fifth.
I reprint the opening of his opinion :

It has long been said—correctly—that the law is the expression of
legislative will. As such, the best evidence of the legislature’s intent is the
carefully chosen words placed purposefully into the text of a statute by our
duly-elected representatives. Critically, then, law-making power—the ability
to transform policy into real-world obligations—lies solely with the
legislative branch. Where an executive agency engages in what is, for all
intents and purposes, “law-making,” the legislature is deprived of its
primary function under our Constitution, and our citizens are robbed of their right to fair representation in government. This is especially true when the executive rule-turned-law criminalizes conduct without the say of the people who are subject to its penalties.
The agency rule at issue here flouts clear statutory text and exceeds
the legislatively-imposed limits on agency authority in the name of public
policy. Because Congress has neither authorized the expansion of firearm
regulation nor permitted the criminalization of previously lawful conduct, the proposed rule constitutes unlawful agency action, in direct contravention of the legislature’s will. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth below, we AFFIRM IN PART and VACATE AND REMAND IN PART the
judgment of the district court.

His first sentence , I am proud to say, is directly from the Louisiana Civil Code that so many people somehow seem afraid of as if it is some mystical book of spells conjured up from the swamp..
I pose a link to the code and invite you all to read the first 8 articles of it and marvel in its directness and simplicity. It pretty much says it all.

Louisiana Civil Code (2022) :: 2022 Louisiana Laws :: US Codes and Statutes :: US Law :: Justia

 

[Racer X]

When I initially read the first paragraph of his ruling, I was struck by how direct and powerful it was. No BS or pontificating, and just straight this is how it is supposed to be, and the issue at hand isn't even close.

 

[ladder13]

Powerful rebuke.

 

[robertrwalsh]

Nice to find judges who can read and understand English (rather than torture it to make it say what they think it should say).

 

[CH4]

Great news! A lot of favorable 2A rulings lately.
Hopefully the “Chevron Deference” dies and dies soon!

 

[LVSteve]

Great news! A lot of favorable 2A rulings lately.
Hopefully the “Chevron Deference” dies and dies soon!

Had to look that up. It adds more proof to my long held assertion that all levels of US governance are incapable of drafting clear legislation in which there is no doubt of its purpose and limits.

 

[johngalt]

Sounds like a really good judge!

I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know the proper legal term, but there used to be a concept that the people have a right to know without any ambiguity what is illegal. If a law is poorly or vaguely written, then that particular application was deemed invalid and found in favor of the defendant.

There is a disturbingly common tactic now of writing laws to be intentionally vague in order to be twisted into covering behavior not explicitly addressed. The excuse seems to be "well, we can't anticipate everything, so we need wiggle room". That is simply tyranny.

 

[Racer X]

Sounds like a really good judge!

I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know the proper legal term, but there used to be a concept that the people have a right to know without any ambiguity what is illegal. If a law is poorly or vaguely written, then that particular application was deemed invalid and found in favor of the defendant.

There is a disturbingly common tactic now of writing laws to be intentionally vague in order to be twisted into covering behavior not explicitly addressed. The excuse seems to be "well, we can't anticipate everything, so we need wiggle room". That is simply tyranny.

There is the Rule of Lenity that if there is a criminal penalty attached, and the law/statute/rule is ambiguous, the interpretation favors the public, and not the government.

So throw out Chevron, which I'm pretty sure they will, SCOTUS granted cert to two Chevron fisheries cases to be heard together, and keep Lenity, then things tip in our favor unless laws are written extremely well, and everything is well defined. That's a tall order to fill.

 

[CH4]

There is the Rule of Lenity that if there is a criminal penalty attached, and the law/statute/rule is ambiguous, the interpretation favors the public, and not the government.

So throw out Chevron, which I'm pretty sure they will, SCOTUS granted cert to two Chevron fisheries cases to be heard together, and keep Lenity, then things tip in our favor unless laws are written extremely well, and everything is well defined. That's a tall order to fill.

Yep
I concur!!!