Rights Restored Last Month,
Revoked a Few Days Later
BATF's $760 Million Budget
Put to Nefarious Use -- Again
from Angel Shamaya
KeepAndBearArms.com
September 8, 2001
If you've been following the Bob Stewart case
over this last 15 months, this won't come as much of a surprise to you. (If you
haven't a clue who Bob Stewart is or how he's being railroaded by the BATF
Thugocracy, links at the bottom of this page will fill you in.)
The judge who restored
Bob Stewart's firearms rights on August 20, 2001 just stamped an order to
undo the restoration, alleging "good cause" as the reason. And the order
to vacate was stamped on August 31, but Stewart didn't find out until September
7 -- and the judge didn't even sign the thing. (Click the picture below
and to the left to see the document.)
|
Rights
Restoration Vacated:
click to enlarge |
One glaring oddity in this situation is the
fact that the Order to Vacate came as a result of the BATF having filed a
"Motion to Reconsider" to the Maricopa County judge who signed the
rights restoration order. The BATF's last
reply to Stewart's Motion to Dismiss told us of their "Motion to
Reconsider" on Page
3.
But in that same 5-page reply, the BATF
attorney basically told us that the order carried no weight and that the
persecution of Bob Stewart could proceed as if it didn't exist. Mr. Welty,
BATF's attorney, said that "...the restoration of civil rights by a
state could not remove the firearms disability imposed as a result of a federal
conviction." If that were true, why did they move so quickly to undo
Mr. Stewart's rights restoration order?
Close examination of the facts in this case
suggest that the BATF knew the rights restoration does carry
weight, and they didn't want to lose the ability to put this man in prison or to
lose a few years from the length of Stewart's prison sentence if he's convicted.
One thing that has turned up in the last few days -- thanks to several helpful
allies -- is that there are two recent rulings in federal district courts that
held that a state court's order for rights restoration can apply to (expunge) a federal
conviction. And one of those two recent rulings was in the 9th circuit
where Stewart's case will be heard.
Additional research has also yielded worthy
court precedent showing the potential to win against the BATF's argument that a
state rights restoration doesn't trump a federal conviction -- based on equal
protection of the law and the fact that there is no federal support system for
rights restoration.
More than a few people would like to see all
legal documentation that can be used in a court of law as justification for the
judge's recent actions. What exactly does the BATF's "Motion for
Reconsideration of Order Restoring Civil Rights" say on its pages? What
alleged "facts" were considered by the judge? If a
state court's order restoring civil rights cannot undo a federal conviction, why
did the BATF bother filing the Motion for Reconsideration? By what process did
the feds extract this Motion to Vacate? And why didn't the judge sign it?
Information that can assist in legal discovery
is still welcome as per instructions on our last
update. This situation is a long way from its conclusion, and we are still
hoping and working to let justice be served through the court system. Bob
Stewart has never been convicted of any crime against another person, he's a
gentleman, a decent husband and father of three handsome young boys, and it
would be nice if a few more legal-minded people would invest some spare time
helping him -- a lone individual defending himself -- find a way to the other
side of this anti-constitution government assault being waged against him.
Related Articles
Ordered from most recent to
oldest:
