Author Topic: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!  (Read 9727 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Divegeek

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 66
  • First Name (Displayed): Jason
MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« on: October 26, 2012, 09:47:59 AM »
Congratulations to all those who worked hard for this.

http://publicdocs.courts.mi.gov:81/OPINIONS/FINAL/COA/20121025_C304582_65_304582.OPN.PDF


A note from Q in the OP (because I can, get over it....)     :

We (the leadership of Michigan Open Carry, Inc) are asking people to just go about their daily lives.  If you have legitimate business in the Library that you were otherwise going to do, by all means conduct your business carrying a firearm in a manner you feel fit.  That being said we are explicitly asking people to behave in a mature, professional manner and NOT go there in mass to make a scene or a circus.  We feel this would be a poor reflection on all open carriers and all guns owners.

We are all free people and I hope you will consider your course of action carefully.
« Last Edit: October 26, 2012, 03:24:42 PM by TheQ »

Offline rugersingleshot

  • Posts: 23
  • Redeemed at a horrible price
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #1 on: October 26, 2012, 09:49:43 AM »
Nice work MOC

Offline gryphon

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4022
  • First Name (Displayed): Dan
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #2 on: October 26, 2012, 09:53:15 AM »


Quote
Accordingly, we hold that state law preempts CADL’s weapon policy because the Legislature, through its statutory scheme in the field of firearm regulation, has completely occupied the field that CADL’s weapon policy attempts to regulate. The trial court, therefore, erroneously granted summary disposition in favor of CADL on the basis that the weapon policy was valid as a matter of law. Furthermore, we hold that the trial court abused its discretion by granting CADL’s request for permanent injunctive relief, i.e., by permanently enjoining MOC, its members, their agents, and members of the public from entering CADL’s buildings and branches while openly carrying a weapon in violation of CADL’s weapon policy.

We conclude that state law preempts CADL’s weapon policy to the extent that it attempts to regulate firearms contrary to the restrictions set forth in MCL 123.1102. The library is a quasi-municipal corporation and, thus, a governmental agency subject to the principles of preemption when it attempts to regulate subject matter that is regulated by the Legislature. The Legislature, through MCL 123.1102, has expressly prohibited local government regulation of firearms and ammunition generally in cities, villages, townships, and counties, including in their libraries. Although a district library is not a local unit of government as defined by MCL 123.1101(a), legislative history, the pervasiveness of the Legislature’s regulation of firearms, and the need for exclusive, uniform state regulation of firearm possession as compared to a patchwork of inconsistent local regulations indicate that the Legislature has completely occupied the field that CADL seeks to enter. Certainly, at a time where this country has witnessed tragic and horrific mass shootings in places of public gathering, the presence of weapons in a library where people of all ages—particularly our youth—gather is alarming and an issue of great concern. However, due to field preemption, the same regulations that apply to public libraries established by one local unit of government apply to those established by two or more local units of government—leaving the matter to the state.

We reverse the trial court’s judgment upholding CADL’s weapon policy to the extent that it attempts to regulate firearms contrary to the restrictions set forth in MCL 123.1102 and vacate the trial court’s order granting permanent injunctive relief.

Offline TheQ

  • Website Content Manager
  • MOC Lifetime Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4263
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc.
  • First Name (Displayed): Phillip
I Am Not A Lawyer (nor a gunsmith).

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Board Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1482
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #4 on: October 26, 2012, 10:52:13 AM »
Congrats to MOC!!!

« Last Edit: October 28, 2012, 11:42:09 AM by scot623 »

Offline WilDChilD

  • Posts: 207
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #5 on: October 26, 2012, 11:10:26 AM »
Do I need to be a Lansing resident to obtain a library card?

I don't know if Dean reads this forum but if somebody talks to him let him know how thankful we are, he was a lot more affordable than CALD's lawyers were.

Does MOC think CALD will appeal?
« Last Edit: October 26, 2012, 01:13:31 PM by scot623 »

Offline gryphon

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4022
  • First Name (Displayed): Dan
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #6 on: October 26, 2012, 11:19:28 AM »
Here's an interesting footnote regarding the dissenting opinion.

Quote
2 With all due respect to our learned colleague in dissent, her analysis fails to acknowledge the fact that Llewellyn is binding precedent, which we as an intermediate court may not choose to disregard or rebuff. As such, the dissent avoids the required application and analysis of field preemption. It is a tautology to say that because the Legislature did not expressly include district libraries in its definition of local units of government as set forth in MCL 123.1101(a), it must have specifically intended not to occupy the field of gun regulation when it comes to the presence of guns in district libraries. While cases often rise and fall on the plain language of a statute, because this matter entails regulation by a lower-level governmental entity in an area that is regulated by the state, it is not a statutory-interpretation case. Such a simplistic analysis would render the doctrine of field preemption a nullity, which it is not.

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Board Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1482
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #7 on: October 26, 2012, 11:28:41 AM »
11 pages of jumble just to get to this

Quote
the same regulations that apply to public libraries established by one local unit of government apply to those established by two or more local units of government

Good greif.

Offline gryphon

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4022
  • First Name (Displayed): Dan
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #8 on: October 26, 2012, 11:28:54 AM »
Wish I could see the look on Rosemary's face when she reads this. Makes me want to rent some pro 2a book. Do I need to be a Lansing resident to obtain a library card?

You need to be an Ingham County resident.  Here's a couple of suggestions.  Good luck on finding the first book below, though.  It's selling for $120 now!


« Last Edit: October 26, 2012, 02:22:26 PM by Onnie »

Offline gryphon

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4022
  • First Name (Displayed): Dan
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #9 on: October 26, 2012, 11:31:05 AM »
11 pages of jumble just to get to this.

You have to show your work. Didn't they teach you that in school?   :P

Quote
Although not included in the definition of “local unit of government” set forth in MCL 123.1101(a), a district library is nevertheless a local unit of government. Excluding a district library from the field of regulation—simply because it is established by two local units of government instead of one—defies the purpose of the statute and it would undoubtedly lead to patchwork regulation.
« Last Edit: October 26, 2012, 11:45:45 AM by gryphon »

Offline METL

  • Posts: 632
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #10 on: October 26, 2012, 01:14:33 PM »
I'm so excited this decision was handed down and I"m LOVING the little slaps to Aquilina...  that was a SERIOUSLY bad decision IMHO...     A child could put that logic together that 2 things that are restricted can't make a 3rd thing mid game and change the rules....   Ridiculous.


We need to get the word out how much tax payers money was spent on this.


I would also like to see some sort of audit of Bender's billed hours to see if there was any fraudulent or fishy billings.

Offline TheQ

  • Website Content Manager
  • MOC Lifetime Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4263
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc.
  • First Name (Displayed): Phillip
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #11 on: October 26, 2012, 02:56:46 PM »
Congrats to MOC!!!

So when is the OC party in CADL?

We (the leadership of Michigan Open Carry, Inc) are asking people to just go about their daily lives.  If you have legitimate business in the Library that you were otherwise going to do, by all means conduct your business carrying a firearm in a manner you feel fit.  That being said we are explicitly asking people to behave in a mature, professional manner and NOT go there in mass to make a scene or a circus.  We feel this would be a poor reflection on all open carriers and all guns owners.

We are all free people and I hope you will consider your course of action carefully.
I Am Not A Lawyer (nor a gunsmith).

Offline bagz013

  • Posts: 134
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #12 on: October 26, 2012, 03:23:06 PM »
Congrats to MOC!!!
Si vis pacem, para bellum
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it- Aristotle
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self- Ernest Hemingway

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Board Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1482
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #13 on: October 26, 2012, 03:42:24 PM »
We (the leadership of Michigan Open Carry, Inc) are asking people to just go about their daily lives.  If you have legitimate business in the Library that you were otherwise going to do, by all means conduct your business carrying a firearm in a manner you feel fit.  That being said we are explicitly asking people to behave in a mature, professional manner and NOT go there in mass to make a scene or a circus.  We feel this would be a poor reflection on all open carriers and all guns owners.

We are all free people and I hope you will consider your course of action carefully.

Sounds good. Especially with some stuff sitting in the House that would add libraries to the PFZ list.

Offline CV67PAT

  • MOC Charter Member
  • Posts: 2615
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #14 on: October 26, 2012, 03:50:42 PM »
I see a lot more here than just the affect on "authorities" from 2 units of government. They addressed the whole "field" of pre-emption as it applies to quasi-local municipal corporations. It looks like school boards and districts may also be affected by this ruling.

To all that assisted in the defense of MOC...

BRAVO ZULU
Want to keep informed of events in your area? Go to http://www.miopencarry.org/update

Offline zigziggityzoo

  • Posts: 8
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #15 on: October 26, 2012, 06:31:53 PM »
I see a lot more here than just the affect on "authorities" from 2 units of government. They addressed the whole "field" of pre-emption as it applies to quasi-local municipal corporations. It looks like school boards and districts may also be affected by this ruling.

To all that assisted in the defense of MOC...

BRAVO ZULU

"Occupation of the field" doctrine is more than just school districts.

It's everything under the state. That includes universities, community college districts, school districts, intermediate school districts, you name it.

I'm sure it'll take another lawsuit to prove this to, say, the University of Michigan, who still has a 60-day misdemeanor on the books for weapons/firearm possession.

Offline CV67PAT

  • MOC Charter Member
  • Posts: 2615
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #16 on: October 26, 2012, 06:51:18 PM »
"Occupation of the field" doctrine is more than just school districts.

It's everything under the state. That includes universities, community college districts, school districts, intermediate school districts, you name it.

I'm sure it'll take another lawsuit to prove this to, say, the University of Michigan, who still has a 60-day misdemeanor on the books for weapons/firearm possession.

I agree zzz. MCRGO v Ferndale already made it abundantly clear, but that didn't stop some legislating from the bench here.
Want to keep informed of events in your area? Go to http://www.miopencarry.org/update

Offline gryphon

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4022
  • First Name (Displayed): Dan
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #17 on: October 26, 2012, 08:47:02 PM »
What is interesting is if anyone gets jammed up for OCing in a CC-free zone, entire paragraphs from Gleicher's dissenting opinion could be lifted verbatim as defense and a pre-emptive strike against judges like Aquilina who would state that being able to OC in a CC-free zone makes no sense, and necessarily and obviously must be unlawful.

Offline sircapsalot

  • Posts: 120
  • Land of the FREE
  • First Name (Displayed): Dj
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #18 on: October 26, 2012, 08:55:49 PM »
Great win for ALL of us!


Offline onnie0047@gmail.com

  • MOC Leadership
  • ****
  • Posts: 210
    • Randys Old Time Radio Shows
Re: MOC vs CADL...MOC wins on appeal!
« Reply #19 on: October 27, 2012, 12:18:19 AM »
I am not a Cop, nor a Lawyer, not even a Medical Doctor, but I did once play a Klingon at Universal Studios!