They had requested and were approved for an extension of time to file.

How convenient for them 

OK I googled around and got:

Drake v. Jerejian
Issue: (1) Whether the Second Amendment secures a right to carry handguns outside the home for self-defense; and (2) whether state officials violate the Second Amendment by requiring that individuals wishing to exercise their right to carry a handgun for self-defense first prove a “justifiable need” for doing so.

Peruta v. San Diego
A decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit pertaining to the legality of San Diego County's restrictive policy requiring that residents provide documentation of good cause that distinguishes the applicant from the mainstream and places the applicant in harm's way before issuing a concealed carry permit

Baker v. Kealoha
The case is Baker v. Kealoha (9th Cir. Mar. 20, 2014), and it’s unsurprising: The same Ninth Circuit panel struck down the California restrictions on gun carrying last month in Peruta v. County of San Diego, and the Hawaii restrictions are in important respects similar to the California ones...

9th Circuit Rejects Gun Control Group Intervention in Hawaii Concealed Carry Case
By Selected News Articles @ 3:58 AM :: 529 Views :: Second Amendment    

Pro-Second Amendment Ruling Stands--Ninth Circuit Rejects Attempts by California AG and Brady Campaign to Meddle with Peruta Decision

From NRA-ILA November 14, 2014

As we’ve been reporting, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit handed gun owners a tremendous victory in February by recognizing the Second Amendment protects a right to bear arms outside the home.  The decision also invalidated the San Diego County Sheriff’s policy of issuing concealed carry permits only upon a showing of extraordinary need for self-protection that would distinguish the applicant “from the mainstream.”

http://www.hawaiifreepress.com/ArticlesMain/tabid/56/ID/13984/9th-Circuit-Rejects-Gun-Control-Group-Intervention-in-Hawaii-Concealed-Carry-Case.aspx?utm_source=November+16%2C+2014+News+from+Hawaii+Free+Press+&utm_campaign=November+16%2C+2014+Email&utm_medium=email

Sorry if I'm way behind the 8 ball here, but am I correct in my understanding that Peruta was argued again in June of this year? What's the timeline for that decision (if any)? It sounds like progress is being made.

*edit oops, just read the other post as well.

Mahalo,

Lyle

Rulings for other big 9th Circuit cases that were heard at around the same time are coming in now, but en banc cases could be slower, I don't know.

Yes!!!!

a few cases from 2013-1014 are still waiting for final decisions .

 

So I am a little confused here. Did our law get changed from "May Issue" to "Shall Issue"? Or do we have to wait for all these decisions?

So I am a little confused here. Did our law get changed from "May Issue" to "Shall Issue"? Or do we have to wait for all these decisions?

we have to wait until the appeal is complete, then wait for the city/ state to establish the rules and regulations if we win

we have to wait until the appeal is complete, then wait for the city/ state to establish the rules and regulations if we win

Thanks Mac! 

Forgive me if I'm asking a tiring question...

WHEN do we expect a ruling?

I understood it would be a long wait, but I must confess it's a bit painful!  The Baker vs Kealoha case is what keeps me coming back to the forum to frequently check in.

Thanks!

Forgive me if I'm asking a tiring question...

WHEN do we expect a ruling?

I understood it would be a long wait, but I must confess it's a bit painful!  The Baker vs Kealoha case is what keeps me coming back to the forum to frequently check in.

Thanks!

After Peruta

Forgive me if I'm asking a tiring question...

WHEN do we expect a ruling?

I understood it would be a long wait, but I must confess it's a bit painful!  The Baker vs Kealoha case is what keeps me coming back to the forum to frequently check in.

Thanks!

There is no legal requirement of any time constraint that a decision be rendered. They can take as long as they want (It has been 2296 days since the original Peruta suit was filed.). Peruta/Richards (which controls Baker) is now the longest outstanding en banc case not having a published decision.

Speculation: Charles Nichols, litigant in the open carry lawsuit (Nichols v. Brown, et. al.) before the Ninth, recently asked for a delay in hearing his case for 1. 90 days, or 2. until Peruta/Richards has been published, as the decision in that case will bear heavily on his case and it wouldn't make much sense to argue it without the results from Peruta/Richards. The clerk of the court (yesterday, February 4, 2016) granted a 60 day delay, thus leading some to think it possible that Peruta/Ricahrds will be announced prior to that 60 day deadline (April  8, 2016). Pure speculation. In the meantime, we have no legal option to exercise our rights. Just the way "they" like it.

Monthly update on interminable nothingness:

It has now been 2330 days since the Peruta case was filed! Woohoo! I wish I could say that's a record and that means that a decision MUST be coming soon (by the "law" of averages), but, alas, a mere 2330 days awaiting "justice" is nowhere near the record, so it could still be forever.

Quickest case scenario: district court ruling against Peruta is upheld by en banc panel, no SCOTUS appeal. We're just where we are now (no CCW licenses for you!). It's over, pending Young.

Next quickest scenario: Case remanded back to district court for do-over, Peruta loses again, appeals to Ninth, 3 judge panel sustains defeat, ask for en banc, defeated, appeal to SCOTUS, they (most likely) deny cert (don't take the case), or they take the case and the defeat is upheld. Six or seven years later, outcome: No CCW licenses for you! Young proceeds.

Longest time case scenario: I don't want to even think about that. 

meanwhile aren't there a bunch of states now authorizing open carry.   seems we have zero traction on anything so far.

In the mean time, the Feds have expanded their investigation of our esteemed C O P and his prosecuting attorney wife and even assigned a 2nd investigator.  Would be nice to see both of them in federal prison.

As far as HAWAII is concerned, I do not see CCW ever being allowed in my lifetime.  I believe our best hope is Cruz gets elected POTUS, appoints a pro gun justice to replace Scalia and then Ginsberg retires and he appoints another pro gun justice and CCW becomes federal law.

meanwhile aren't there a bunch of states now authorizing open carry.   seems we have zero traction on anything so far.

Of course we know why certain people and government agents oppose bearing arms, especially without government permission, as they have 223 years of evidence from Vermont of the rampant "gun crime", bloodbath in the streets, killings over fender benders, "accidental" discharges in public, etc. The only problem is that Vermont has one of the lowest overall crime rates in the United States, including homicides (lower than Hawaii). The (bearing) arms rights deniers have no evidence, but in some states and regions (Ninth Circuit) they do have political/judicial power to infringe our rights. And they do precisely that. Because they can. Meanwhile, in most of the rest of the United States:

Constitutional Carry States as of March 10, 2016

Vermont: July 9, 1793 (Affirmed in State v. Rosenthal - 1903)

Alaska: September 9, 2003

Arizona: July 29, 2010

Wyoming: July 1, 2011 (Legal Wyoming Residents Only!)

Arkansas: August 16, 2013

Kansas: July 1, 2015

Maine: October 15, 2015

West Virginia: May 24, 2016 (Legislative override of governor's veto on March 5, 2016)

Constitutional Carry Bill Statuses 2016

Dead
-Virginia
-Utah
-Colorado

Pending
-Michigan
-Tennesse
-New Hampshire
-Mississippi
-Idaho
-Indiana
-Missouri
-Kentucky
-Louisiana (constitutional amendment and legislative bill)
-Pennsylvania

Hybrid
-South Carolina [permitless concealed carry]

Passed [2016]
-West Virginia

Not that it necessarily means anything, but just compare the Hawaii state motto to that of West Virginia, which is "Montani Semper Liberi" (mountaineers (are) always free). Just sayin'...

he's doing a great job....
http://khon2.com/2016/03/09/honolulu-police-chief-exceeds-expectations-in-annual-evaluation/

I hope Wolfwood won't mind me sharing his response on the CalGuns Peruta thread (where many have bemoaned the lengthy wait for the en banc decision) here:

Wolfwood: Seriously my carry case Baker has a en banc petition on it as well. I do not get any updates from the court and have no idea when a decision will be issued. The NRA's guys have no idea either. Come back in the summer is my guess.

* * * *
I did not know that the Baker (Hawaii) case had requested an en banc hearing. I thought since Peruta/Ricahrds/Baker were all heard and decided the same by the original three judge panel that the Peruta/Richards en banc decision would apply to Baker, and that would (likely) be the end of it. I'd be surprised if the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals took Baker separately, since it seems to argue essentially the same points as Peruta/Richards except referring to the Hawaii statutes language rather than California's. That would stretch out the time line even further...

I read somewhere that it's possible they are delaying a response so that if the case goes to Supreme Court, there might be a replacement for Scalia by then.