It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: SR1TX
Please delete your post. That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Precedent is set by court cases that have happened. The opinions from the Appellate are nothing to that process.
originally posted by: SR1TX
originally posted by: F4guy
originally posted by: dothedew
a reply to: JoshuaCox
There is no precedent set.... but it takes a lawsuit to set a precedent. Depending on how this goes, if it's shown to have merit and go to court, it could potentially work it's way up the system. If it's shown to have no merit and the case is dismissed, then that's that. Boom, this case will set precedent either way you look at it. It has a chance, as stated that he is legally allowed to purchase a firearm. Purchase/ownership of a firearm is a constitutionally protected right. Hell, Purchasing a Cake isn't a protected right, but that still went to court.
We'll just wait and se how this all goes.
We all know it will be dismissed if it makes it to the 9th circuit court of appeals, however, seeing how the rest of the Court judges read case law while the 9th circuit judges read Dr. Seuss Books.........
Sorry, but that's not precedent. A lawsuit doesn't set precedent, except for the parties to that lawsuit. But that is called res judicata and not precedent. Precedent only comes from reported appellate cases. So, if the kid wins, and the store appeals and it goes through that whole process, and the appellate court renders a decision, and further orders that the opinion be published, then, and only then, does the appeals court opinion and order become precedent. And only some precedent becomes binding. A Washington state case is not precedent in Montana, unless the opinion is that of a U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and both cases are in the same circuit. And the precedential value of a case is very narrow. If the kid wins on appeal because the store had its appellate brief printed in 6 point type instead of 8 point, it has no effect on the question of whether 20 year olds can buy guns from a store that decides not to sell to him.
FWIW, my opinion as a retred lawyer, judge, and law school professor, the kid is going to lose.
Please delete your post. That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Precedent is set by court cases that have happened. The opinions from the Appellate are nothing to that process.
originally posted by: F4guy
originally posted by: roadgravel
businesses can refuse service to any person for any reason, unless the business is discriminating against a protected class
Not true
As a retired judge, lawyer and law school professor, I can tell you that it absolutely is true, unless you are a common carrier, and even then, you can set rules that discriminate against some. Airlines will not carry an unaccompanied 3 year old, therby discriminating against 3 year olds. Drunks are not a protected class so bars can discriminate against them by refusing service.
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: SR1TX
That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard
So angry, yet so incorrect.
Precedent is set by court cases that have happened.
Precedent is either binding or persuasive. For it to be either one of those, it almost always has to come from a court higher than the lowest court. A local district court cannot set precedent by itself because decisions in that court don't impact other courts or higher courts in almost every case.
So no, simply hearing a case in district court does not set precedent once the case is settled because precedent means a decision that binds lower courts to a certain decision.
In the modern legal system, the term precedent refers to a rule, or principle of law, that has been established by a previous ruling by a court of higher authority, such as an appeals court, or a supreme court. Courts in the U.S. legal system place a high value on making judgements based on consistent rules in similar cases. In such a system, cases based on similar facts have a fair and predictable outcome. To explore this concept, consider the following precedent definition.
The court hierarchy is critical for the doctrine of precedent to function effectively. A precedent set in one court applies to all lower courts – but only in the same hierarchy. A precedent in the Supreme Court of Victoria, for example, is binding on the County Court of Victoria and the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria – however it is not binding on courts in other jurisdictions, such as the Federal courts or courts of other States. A precedent can be overturned in a higher court in the same jurisdiction. A County Court precedent, for instance, can be appealed and overturned in the Supreme Court. This allows some flexibility, review and challenge of precedents; they are not set in stone.
In the US legal system, judicial decisions create legal precedents that guide judges in deciding similar future cases. The decisions of the highest court in a jurisdiction create mandatory precedent that must be followed by lower courts in that jurisdiction. For example, the US Supreme Court creates binding precedent that all other federal courts must follow. Similarly, intermediate appellate courts (such as the federal circuit courts of appeal) create mandatory precedent for the courts below them.
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: SR1TX
In the modern legal system, the term precedent refers to a rule, or principle of law, that has been established by a previous ruling by a court of higher authority, such as an appeals court, or a supreme court. Courts in the U.S. legal system place a high value on making judgements based on consistent rules in similar cases. In such a system, cases based on similar facts have a fair and predictable outcome. To explore this concept, consider the following precedent definition.
Just because you say wrong over and over doesn't make it so.
The court hierarchy is critical for the doctrine of precedent to function effectively. A precedent set in one court applies to all lower courts – but only in the same hierarchy. A precedent in the Supreme Court of Victoria, for example, is binding on the County Court of Victoria and the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria – however it is not binding on courts in other jurisdictions, such as the Federal courts or courts of other States. A precedent can be overturned in a higher court in the same jurisdiction. A County Court precedent, for instance, can be appealed and overturned in the Supreme Court. This allows some flexibility, review and challenge of precedents; they are not set in stone.
Just because you say wrong over and over doesn't make it so.
In the US legal system, judicial decisions create legal precedents that guide judges in deciding similar future cases. The decisions of the highest court in a jurisdiction create mandatory precedent that must be followed by lower courts in that jurisdiction. For example, the US Supreme Court creates binding precedent that all other federal courts must follow. Similarly, intermediate appellate courts (such as the federal circuit courts of appeal) create mandatory precedent for the courts below them.
Just because you say wrong over and over doesn't make it so.
originally posted by: Reydelsol
originally posted by: LordAhriman
Neither of these businesses have to sell guns, period, and they can refuse a sale of anything to anybody. This is stupid.
Funny how people are demanding the government force business to sell guns...... A govement forcing a private business to sell a product?.......Thats communism...... The OP is asking for communism......
O and before someone points it out, I don't think a shop should be forced to sell wedding cakes to people either.
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
originally posted by: F4guy
If the kid wins on appeal because the store had its appellate brief printed in 6 point type instead of 8 point, it has no effect on the question of whether 20 year olds can buy guns from a store that decides not to sell to him.
FWIW, my opinion as a retred lawyer, judge, and law school professor, the kid is going to lose.
8 point type? Har har...
I would like to hear why you think he will lose, though. Personally, I don't think this case would exist if it wasn't perhaps destined to lose...designed to lose. Did you read the Complaint? Are there any glaring red flags that you see? Link
The Oregon laws cited seem pretty clear about businesses discriminating based on age, but if this case loses...it will be enough to put others off from even trying to challenge age-discrimination gun sales policies & practices, in Oregon.
originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: notsure1
So you are ok sending an 18 year old off with a gun to fight and dies for his country, but they can't own a gun at 18 in their "free" country.
originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: notsure1
but the law says they can own a gun at 18 so you are not making a valid point.
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: F4guy
I was laughing at 6 or 8 point type, not 10 and 12.
I know there are rules...but your examples were so small I found it funny.
originally posted by: Reydelsol
originally posted by: howtonhawky
I was hoping that someone would stand up for their rights.
What rights?
The 2nd Amendment does not apply to businesses only the government. A business has the right to decide who it sells guns too.
The 2nd is irrelevant in this case.