Rhinhart decision in

[okbasspro]

Was on AMRA Facebook post




Unfortunately, and regretfully, we have just been contacted by Brandon Rinehart and his case was denied by the United States Supreme Court.

Here is the email to Brandon from PLF:

Brandon,

Unfortunately, the Supreme Court denied your petition this morning. I’m sure this is a disappointment to you and James, as it is for me.

The silver lining is that, although this is the end of your case, the defense of miners’ rights continues. James has done great work challenging Oregon’s suction-dredge ban in Bohmker in the Ninth Circuit, which PLF supported as amicus on behalf of Western Mining Alliance. A win in that case will render California’s ban preempted too. The SG’s brief highlighted Bohmker as another opportunity for the Court to consider the preemption question if the Ninth Circuit goes the wrong way.

There is no justice............

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[Assembler]

If more details comes out please post. Thanks.

 

[Gravelwasher]

totally blows!!

No science or truth behind the ban, it's all bad!!

 

[Assembler]

totally blows!!

No science or truth behind the ban, it's all bad!!

Yes science or truth may not be part of the ruling. Just trying to find out any information. Thanks
The wording used in the ruling can disclose a lot.

 

[winners58]

Brad Jones - GPAA post; Supreme Court rejects Rinehart case

 

[Reed Lukens]

Here's the link from our true news source...
U.S. Supreme Court Slams Door on California Suction Dredge Miners

 

[Terry Soloman]

I hate that I was right on this one, but if you looked hard enough at the case you knew it was lost a long time ago. This is an EDUCATION and PUBLIC RELATIONS problem, and not one miner's organization seems to understand this. Too bad, but that is where society is right now.

 

[Assembler]

I hate that I was right on this one, but if you looked hard enough at the case you knew it was lost a long time ago. This is an EDUCATION and PUBLIC RELATIONS problem, and not one miner's organization seems to understand this. Too bad, but that is where society is right now.

Yes. one question in this "Case" (or in society) these days, how does "Configuration of the Lode line or placer mineral deposit conform to the public system of rectangular surveys"?

Another question does this "Case" cover a "Ruling" about a "Surface location survey" vs. "Mineral deposits"?

 

[Garrote Gold]

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...DD8F9E143E2016E10C24DD8F9E143E2016E&FORM=VIRE


Let nature take it course, soon nothing for them to save then we can dig haha

 

[Assembler]

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...DD8F9E143E2016E10C24DD8F9E143E2016E&FORM=VIRE


Let nature take it course, soon nothing for them to save then we can dig haha

Can you "Dig it".......LOL.

 

[ncclaymaker]

Who would have foreseen this! The entire state of the state of California has been like this for decades. The "conservationist" clubs would sue the various forestry services to prevent CONTROLLED burning of sage and overburdened fuel sources in the forests. Now these "experts" have been the cause of massive UNCONTROLLED/UNCONTROLLABLE conflagrations for firefighters to deal with. Instead of being science-based organizations, they have resorted to pseudoscience that equates to - "if you cannot dazzle them with your brilliance, then baffle them with bullsh*t"." I admire those that have fought a good fight, but it has been for naught. I suggested years ago, vote with your feet and your wallets. There are still vast swaths of this country that have not yet become gentrified "nanny" states. Move on and move away. There is absolutely no logic to complain and then pay high taxes that are used to revoke your rights, or in California's case, a permitted "priviledge".

 

[Assembler]

Survey?, discovery?, the case was about preemption.
you come on here "lets do a survey" “Mineral Monuments”? “Witness corner, witness point”? “Field notes”? Marking the “Mineral deposit”
NONE of THAT Pertains to this case whatsoever, You are NOT pointing out "Mining history" and a "Foundation in Law"
You don't understand, you are describing how to obtain or define a mineral estate BUT this about the "Right to Mine".
the right to mine is an "action", to prospect, mine, and perfect/obtain title, It's a self initiated right, granted by the 1866 and 1872 mining law.

The "Courts Opinion" should reflect this right.

 

[okbasspro]

How a "Mining claim is defined" is a very important question.
Non-overturned "Mining Case Law" covers this yes.
Waiting for a written "Opinion" at this time.

By the way "Cadastral survey" is applied to the establishment of the land boundaries and subdivisions by the running and marking of the lines that are required by the plan...........
The law provides that the original corners established during the process of the survey shall forever remain fixed in position............The courts attach major importance to evidence relating to the original position of the monument, such evidence being given far greater weight than the record relating to bearing and lengths of lines.

I-TEAM Exclusive: Cliven Bundy discusses case dismissal, family reunion, calls out sheriff
I-TEAM Exclusive: Cliven Bundy discusses case dismissal, family
Take a look at the bottom.

Assembler you need to quit hijacking post this post is not about Clive Bundy or location or any other of the crap you post and quote yourself on.You have a bad habit of doing this on all your post.It only adds a bunch of non relevant information that members have to scroll thru.

 

[Goldwasher]

It is very frustrating. Would be nice if the mods actually knew anything about mining and law and theses cases and would moderate him properly instead of allowing the game playing to continue

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

It is very frustrating. Would be nice if the mods actually knew anything about mining and law and theses cases and would moderate him properly instead of allowing the game playing to continue

We do not need to know mining laws or mining to moderate TreasureNet forums, we have been doing it for years. We know treasureNet rules and unless TreasureNet rules or guidelines are broken there is no reason for a mod to step in.

 

[ncclaymaker]

On the SCOTUS decision - Not really surprising at all. But, who doesn't recognize that the manufacturers, distributors and yes, website operators, share to a large degree this result. There is an old Russian proverb... "Don't wait until your back is firmly against the wall, before you can read the writing that's upon it." Fact of the matter is clear and simple, the industry has failed its' customers and users by not organizing and LOBBYING our corrupt government. Either in Sacramento or Washington, DC. Now that the horse is out of the barn, the tree huggers and toad lovers will now have a legal decision to go to one court after another to seek the banning of what they self righteously describe, as the wholesale rape or destruction of mercury laden waterways. Don't worry, your big brother always knows best, and is doing all of this to "protect" you from harming yourself or some mindless organism that resides in a puddle of water. In the meantime, buck up, stiff upper lip lads, for you have been properly CALIFORNICATED.

Please don't take anything that I've written as serious or personal. I seem to have a bit of sarcasm that is running full throttle today. So, in the meantime, stay calm, and move to climes that aren't so bloody hostile.

 

[n01d3x]

"Keep the discussion civil, respectful and on TOPIC."
Just saying....

 

[winners58]

Please, Our friend Brandon's appeal case was rejected by the SCOTUS
I'm asking if not for me then out of respect for Brandon
he is a member here if he looks at this thread and see's a bunch of copy/paste's of
"lets study about survey's" its not going to help, it's not appropriate, PLEASE...

the opinion of the California court;
http://peoplevrinehart.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/082216_Final-Supreme-Court-Opinion.pdf

 

[Goldwasher]

exactly not on topic at all

 

[Assembler]

Please, Our friend Brandon's appeal case was rejected by the SCOTUS
I'm asking if not for me then out of respect for Brandon
he is a member here if he looks at this thread and see's a bunch of copy/paste's of
"lets study about survey's" its not going to help, it's not appropriate, PLEASE...

the opinion of the California court;
http://peoplevrinehart.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/082216_Final-Supreme-Court-Opinion.pdf

Please tell how this is not "Appropriate" after reading the "Case".
Thanks