So what is the legal strategy in nullifying the Honolulu City Council bill?

Is there a reason that the current HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit) didn't challege the Honolulu City Council bill also, at the same time?

Is the membership page for HiFiCo down? I clicked on membership to try and renew it but says not found or something like that

Is the membership page for HiFiCo down? I clicked on membership to try and renew it but says not found or something like that

Theyre working on it.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

So what is the legal strategy in nullifying the Honolulu City Council bill?

Is there a reason that the current HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit) didn't challege the Honolulu City Council bill also, at the same time?

State is bigger than county. If state law falls, county ordinance is more likely to fall as well. Compared to the other way around.

I trust Alan Beck and his strategy.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

This is how I see it'll play out, but its very complex and there are a ton of variables..

65% chance the 9th circuit will stop our TRO/preliminary injunction

2nd circuit Antonyuk v  Hochul decision should come out within two months.   Might be a middle of the road decision.

50/50% chance SCOTUS grants a preliminary injunction in the Fall, depends how the 2nds decision is written and if it goes en banc.

If SCOTUS grants the injunction, we might be carrying in Honolulu at the end of the year.  If not, might be another year or two from now.

Thank you all so very much for sharing.  So it sounds like we let the Hawaii State CCW law make its way through appeals court(s) (i,e., 9th Circuit, US Supreme Court), see where it how it ends up, and then pursue the Honolulu Ordinance, knowing how the Hawaii State CCW law ended up.

So the state is appealing the TRO. Even though they couldn't prove any history and tradition, they said the judge was wrong in her ruling.  This appeal is highly unusual.

What I'm surprised about is that the judge said something along the lines of "what's the big deal, if its concealed, who's going to know one is carrying". In response to the states "public safety" weak argument.

The state knows if they lose this lawsuit, the remaining places will fall as well. Which is who HIFICO donations are needed. Our historian needs to work more than normal because HI won't give up.  And this is what HI wants, is to make it too expensive for anyone to challenge. The future of HI gun laws all begin on this lawsuit.

The 9th denied the states appeal and said its up to Kobayashi. The judge who granted the TRO.  She has till 9/1 to make a decision.

Until then, TRO is in force.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

The 9th denied the states appeal and said its up to Kobayashi. The judge who granted the TRO.  She has till 9/1 to make a decision.

Until then, TRO is in force.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Is it possible to request tro for the city ordinance? It's basically useless still....

you don't request a tro
you file a suit, and the judge issues the order...

Is it possible to request tro for the city ordinance? It's basically useless still....

Is it possible to request tro for the city ordinance? It's basically useless still....

possibilities:

New lawsuit filed against the countys
Countys could pass an ordinance to change sensitive places.
Mayor can publicly say sensitive places won't be enforced during the lawsuit.

For all of these, we have to see if the TRO continues or is stopped.  It's fate is still pending.

Irony at its finest

Any updates on Judge Kobayashi's ruling?

The 9th denied the states appeal and said its up to Kobayashi. The judge who granted the TRO.  She has till 9/1 to make a decision.

Until then, TRO is in force.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Any updates on Judge Kobayashi's ruling?

As of now, no.

Any updates on Judge Kobayashi's ruling?

The state submitted another brief claiming public safety and public interest.

State response

https://drive.google.com/file/d/13Q8yUXFOF1jxP9ojsN7JGT-y481FWERa/view?usp=sharing

The State still continues to use interest balancing as an argument, yet it has been already ruled that arguments cannot be used anymore.  Are they dense, stupid, or both?

The State still continues to use interest balancing as an argument, yet it has been already ruled that arguments cannot be used anymore.  Are they dense, stupid, or both?

Thats all they got as they have no history and tradition. Even though the AG stated they did. She and her deputy AG should be fired for lying, but they lied to their own kind, so no problem.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

State's main focus is on standing on each point along with their historical positions.  The state isn't talking to Kobayashi as they know she won't change her mind.  Instead they are talking over her to the 9th Circuit for the appeals and are setting this case up for it already.

State knows interest balancing is a losing cause, but just threw it in there anyways.  Teter & Yukutake made sure of that.

State likely assumed they would defeat the TRO request because of Hawaii judge. The TRO woke them up and they are going to push harder now.

State response

https://drive.google.com/file/d/13Q8yUXFOF1jxP9ojsN7JGT-y481FWERa/view?usp=sharing

These hired gun attorneys have some talent. Soros pulled serious strings on this one.