[harpseal]

Thank you for your expertise. I guess I should start cheering. Now, am I correct that this case then provides conflicting interpretaions at the Court of Appeals level that will make the issues ripe for the supreme Court to issue mandamus when an appropriate case comes before it?

Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown

[writmeister]

I'm not sure if we have a clean conflict because I have not read opinions from the other circuits. I suspect we will need a clean conflict because the Supreme Court probably does not want to get into this issue and will look to avoid it.

Emerson won't be able to take the "individual rights" issue up because he prevailed on that issue. Legal term: issue not ripe.

It would be up to the government. Under the clintonistas, they would have automatically appealed it. Under the new regime, I just don't know if they will switch positions (hopefully). If they do, they will want to make sure this case does not have some factual quirk which could mess up the pure "individual rights" issue. I suspect the government will not appeal this issue -- leaving it only as good law in the 5th circuit (Texas, Louisiana & Mississippi).

The best chance to take it up to the Supreme Court will probably come in a case from a more liberal circuit where the gun-owner makes an Emerson-type claim and the circuit court finds that 2nd amendment is a "collectivist right" or a "state right". Then, that gun-owner will be able to file a writ of certiorari claiming conflict of circuits and that his claim is ripe because he did not prevail at the circuit level.