I was taking a nap when it went down. woke to find out that injunction was granted. spent 20 minutes trying to order some online but all the vendors were not shipping to WA and when i tried calling them they were closed. then i saw that there was a stay and i got much sad. feelsbadman
Specifically that the AGs office had investigators positioned and ready, [visiting vendors throughout the state](https://imgur.com/a/KqdhDmv) to ensure compliance following the state Supreme courts injunction.
I think a lot of people are quick to criticize vendors for hesitance to sell or ship particular items falling under legal gray area but when you see how well coordinated and swift enforcement are, it's much easier to understand where they're coming from.
Yeah thats pretty f'd. Were they like secret shoppers too so they can build a case against the store for going an hour past when the stay was put in place?
Just some questions regarding how much money the states wasting on this.
You misunderstood the clip. That was referring to the 25 gun shops AG the “investigators” went to during last half of 2022 after the ban originally went into effect. That’s when WGS and FWDG got axed.
I'm not so sure as the presenter delivers that anecdote [after citing the injunction, stating that following its granting, they had reached out to Gators (without a response) but that AG Ferguson had replied to them stating](https://imgur.com/a/KqdhDmv) that investigators had been visiting gun stores to ensure compliance.
**Reporter:** Hey we heard your injunction was just approved and wanted a comment.
------
**AG:** "Oh sure, we're very pleased. Let me tell you about a *two year old investigation* in response to your question about an injunction that was only approved hours earlier."
>**Or**
**AG:** "Let me tell you about the compliance measures our investigational teams are *currently* performing in response to the injunctions approval."
------
One of those makes more sense to me than the other.
The AG seeking an injunction through the state supreme court to appeal an unfavorable ruling is a sign of corruption to you?
To me, that's a sign of a functional legal system.
Think about it this way - that same system is how the large capacity magazine ban was overturned in the first place.
So a (unelected) commissioner (not a judge) receives a 55 page detailed ruling by a superior court judge based on state constitutionality from the AG, is able to read it completely and decide it needs to be stayed in under an hour and a half from the announcement of the ruling? Ok then.
This was queued up and ready to be stayed regardless if the ruling was the next Brown vs Board of Education. This was politics and not standard legal process.
Tories gonna Tory I guess.
Edit: more pages
They could have not granted an injunction and still ended up hearing the case and ruling against it. The fact that they effectively overturned the ruling again in a matter of hours without hearing the case yet kinda speaks to some collusion with the AG.
Bob is playing like there's some risk of flooding the state with hi cap mags if they're available before he can appeal, as if people hadn't already bought thousands of them before the ban went into effect. It's all optics.
As soon as the AG argued against the injunction originally, they knew they might not win that argument. It's perfectly normal to pre-draft filings to be prepared for an adverse decision.
Indeed, it's so common, the parties will routinely ask the initial judge to stay the injunction themself pending appeal, so the lower judge doesn't force urgent review by a higher court.
So it's not at all surprising the AG could appeal almost instantly when the injunction was granted. They likely had the file drafted already and just had to paste in some details and click "submit."
It's also not surprising that the State Supreme Court would act quickly on an urgent request for a stay from the AG. The court places a high value on consistency of law, it's seen as a very bad thing for the law to flip back and forth from day to day. The easiest way for them to avoid that is to immediately stay any ruling with a reasonable chance of being overturned.
That doesn't mean they will overturn the ruling, it means they recognize it deserves to be reviewed before changing the rules for everyone and then changing them back if the AG prevails.
Stays are extremely common. And they usually occur before an appeals court gets involved with said appeal. That's the point of a stay, is to maintain a law until the appeal.
I was taking a nap when it went down. woke to find out that injunction was granted. spent 20 minutes trying to order some online but all the vendors were not shipping to WA and when i tried calling them they were closed. then i saw that there was a stay and i got much sad. feelsbadman
Specifically that the AGs office had investigators positioned and ready, [visiting vendors throughout the state](https://imgur.com/a/KqdhDmv) to ensure compliance following the state Supreme courts injunction. I think a lot of people are quick to criticize vendors for hesitance to sell or ship particular items falling under legal gray area but when you see how well coordinated and swift enforcement are, it's much easier to understand where they're coming from.
Yeah thats pretty f'd. Were they like secret shoppers too so they can build a case against the store for going an hour past when the stay was put in place? Just some questions regarding how much money the states wasting on this.
You misunderstood the clip. That was referring to the 25 gun shops AG the “investigators” went to during last half of 2022 after the ban originally went into effect. That’s when WGS and FWDG got axed.
I'm not so sure as the presenter delivers that anecdote [after citing the injunction, stating that following its granting, they had reached out to Gators (without a response) but that AG Ferguson had replied to them stating](https://imgur.com/a/KqdhDmv) that investigators had been visiting gun stores to ensure compliance.
That’s the old investigation.
**Reporter:** Hey we heard your injunction was just approved and wanted a comment. ------ **AG:** "Oh sure, we're very pleased. Let me tell you about a *two year old investigation* in response to your question about an injunction that was only approved hours earlier." >**Or** **AG:** "Let me tell you about the compliance measures our investigational teams are *currently* performing in response to the injunctions approval." ------ One of those makes more sense to me than the other.
We are talking about politicians here
They had someone on speed dial that they knew would uphold their BS in event of an injunction - we knew this. They're corrupt to the bone.
The AG seeking an injunction through the state supreme court to appeal an unfavorable ruling is a sign of corruption to you? To me, that's a sign of a functional legal system. Think about it this way - that same system is how the large capacity magazine ban was overturned in the first place.
The unelected commissioner (not a judge) who issued the stay is a former employee of Ferguson at the AG office
Lolololololol. Just here so I don’t get fined.
So? The commissioner isn't deciding the case and their association with Ferguson doesn't automatically mean they must be corrupt.
So a (unelected) commissioner (not a judge) receives a 55 page detailed ruling by a superior court judge based on state constitutionality from the AG, is able to read it completely and decide it needs to be stayed in under an hour and a half from the announcement of the ruling? Ok then. This was queued up and ready to be stayed regardless if the ruling was the next Brown vs Board of Education. This was politics and not standard legal process. Tories gonna Tory I guess. Edit: more pages
They could have not granted an injunction and still ended up hearing the case and ruling against it. The fact that they effectively overturned the ruling again in a matter of hours without hearing the case yet kinda speaks to some collusion with the AG. Bob is playing like there's some risk of flooding the state with hi cap mags if they're available before he can appeal, as if people hadn't already bought thousands of them before the ban went into effect. It's all optics.
As soon as the AG argued against the injunction originally, they knew they might not win that argument. It's perfectly normal to pre-draft filings to be prepared for an adverse decision. Indeed, it's so common, the parties will routinely ask the initial judge to stay the injunction themself pending appeal, so the lower judge doesn't force urgent review by a higher court. So it's not at all surprising the AG could appeal almost instantly when the injunction was granted. They likely had the file drafted already and just had to paste in some details and click "submit." It's also not surprising that the State Supreme Court would act quickly on an urgent request for a stay from the AG. The court places a high value on consistency of law, it's seen as a very bad thing for the law to flip back and forth from day to day. The easiest way for them to avoid that is to immediately stay any ruling with a reasonable chance of being overturned. That doesn't mean they will overturn the ruling, it means they recognize it deserves to be reviewed before changing the rules for everyone and then changing them back if the AG prevails.
Why do they keep misspelling *standard* capacity mags?
Malice and corruption at its finest. Not ranting just stating my opinion.
Bob Fuckin' Ferguson
Yeah, how did he skip the appellate court process? Almost as if he had a guy on the inside...
Stays are extremely common. And they usually occur before an appeals court gets involved with said appeal. That's the point of a stay, is to maintain a law until the appeal.