D.C. Circuit denies en banc petition in Wrenn v. D.C.! On to #SCOTUS?

[Swordsmyth]

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia’s decision last Thursday (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/09/29/concealed-carry-ruling-could-help-put-gun-issue-on-supreme-court-agenda.html) on whether to allow the full court, en banc, to rehear its two previous rulings against Washington, D.C.’s onerous concealed-carry restrictions was short and to the point: “Upon consideration of the petitions of the District of Columbia … for rehearing en banc … it is … ordered that the petitions be denied.”

More at: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/27032-appeals-court-denies-hearing-on-dc-concealed-carry-law

[Swordsmyth]

D.C. Decides Not to Appeal Decision Striking Down Restrictive Gun-Carry Law Provisionhttps://www.infowars.com/d-c-decides-not-to-appeal-decision-striking-down-restrictive-gun-carry-law-provision/

[Weston White]

I am of the opinion that governmental entities should not be privileged to appeal cases, whether or not the decision is in their favor, except they should be permitted to make a special plea by a timely hearing to their highest state or federal court of that jurisdiction, being designed to clarify specific and narrow legal aspects discovered within the facts and findings of that particular case. Perhaps, one caveat would be when there is an actual victim or victims and are willing to go on record that they are concerned the trial court had errored.

[Swordsmyth]

I am of the opinion that governmental entities should not be privileged to appeal cases, whether or not the decision is in their favor, except they should be permitted to make a special plea by a timely hearing to their highest state or federal court of that jurisdiction, being designed to clarify specific and narrow legal aspects discovered within the facts and findings of that particular case. Perhaps, one caveat would be when there is an actual victim or victims and are willing to go on record that they are concerned the trial court had errored.

Perhaps, but either way in a case of this kind we should be able to appeal to the supreme court for a nation wide judgement in our favor whether we win or lose at the lower court.

[Weston White]

Perhaps, but either way in a case of this kind we should be able to appeal to the supreme court for a nation wide judgement in our favor whether we win or lose at the lower court.

If I recall correctly, a person can appeal even if they win, however are in disagreement with the sum of findings or that an error was made; and also that an appeal can be fast-tracked to the highest appellate court available within a respective jurisdiction.

[Swordsmyth]

If I recall correctly, a person can appeal even if they win, however are in disagreement with the sum of findings or that an error was made; and also that an appeal can be fast-tracked to the highest appellate court available within a respective jurisdiction.

But we should have a right to appeal to the SCOTUS for a nation wide ruling even if we don't disagree with the sum of the findings or believe an error to have been made.

[Weston White]

But we should have a right to appeal to the SCOTUS for a nation wide ruling even if we don't disagree with the sum of the findings or believe an error to have been made.

Oh I see, totally agree with that too. I wonder if there is a qualifying rule or exception for that perhaps, like for a federal question type of thing?