Re: California standard-capacity mag ban challenge--Duncan v. Bonta

426
sikacz wrote: Wed Dec 22, 2021 11:46 am
featureless wrote: Wed Dec 22, 2021 11:39 am
highdesert wrote: Wed Dec 22, 2021 10:32 am Thanks for the update. SCOTUS accepts less than 3% of the cert petitions, let's hope they pick this case. Yup in CA one has to stay up on the law, we have a full time legislature that loves to pass new laws and a governor who automatically signs them.
There's some hope SCOTUS will hold the case pending NYSRPA and then remand it for review. They are holding a similar mag ban case currently. We'll see in just 6 to 7 short months...
How wonderful, just in time to make it a midterm issue. Sometimes I think the SCOTUS is slow and antiquated. The pace they move at is more suited to a pre-information age society. Perhaps, they need to be all fired and people with more interest in reviewing cases put in their place.
Compared to CA9, SCOTUS is quick. That every gun law in California needs to roll through CA9 prior to them ruling for the state is fucking tedious. Justice delayed and all that.

Re: California standard-capacity mag ban challenge--Duncan v. Bonta

427
Duncan has filed requesting Cert at SCOTUS.
The questions presented are:
1. Whether a blanket, retrospective, and
confiscatory law prohibiting ordinary law-abiding
citizens from possessing magazines in common use
violates the Second Amendment.
2. Whether a law dispossessing citizens without
compensation of property that was lawfully acquired
and long possessed without incident violates the
Takings Clause.
3. Whether the “two-step” approach that the
Ninth Circuit and other lower courts apply to Second
Amendment challenges is consistent with the
Constitution and this Court’s precedent.
https://michellawyers.com/wp-content/up ... -FINAL.pdf

Link to SCOTUS docket: https://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.asp ... -1194.html

Re: California standard-capacity mag ban challenge--Duncan v. Bonta

429
sikacz wrote: Wed Mar 09, 2022 10:37 am Any predictions?
No predictions. But my hope is that SCOTUS will hold it, along with an AWB case they've held, and remand with instructions to follow the hopefully solid and clear win in NYSRP (New York carry case) decision to be issued by July. I'm excited we might get some actual refinement on what infringement means and what level of review lower courts must use. July is right around the corner, so we'll see. Or there could be a nuclear exchange just prior to the decision and those that survive will be back to clubs. In this day and age, predictions are useless! :)

Re: California standard-capacity mag ban challenge--Duncan v. Bonta

430
I also hope they issue their decision in NYSRPA vs Bruen before July. Now would be a good time while Ukraine is dominating the news and we're all cheering on Ukrainians defending themselves. Duncan vs Bonta would be a good case after WA's legislators passed mag restrictions, it needs to have its day at SCOTUS. If they do grant cert, it would likely be argued in the new term starting in October.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: California standard-capacity mag ban challenge--Duncan v. Bonta

436
The problem is CA9 will take any justification proffered by AG Bonta. The state is _screaming_ "new standard, couldn't possibly have known we needed to provide historical justification!" The problem is, that is exactly what Heller demanded. So, CA9 is giving the state a do over based on a complete and concerted misrepresentation of Heller. This shit should have been settled at the District Court shortly after Heller. But instead, we'll get to ride the gun control train all the way back to SCOTUS. Again.

Re: California standard-capacity mag ban challenge--Duncan v. Bonta

437
featureless wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 1:50 pm The problem is CA9 will take any justification proffered by AG Bonta. The state is _screaming_ "new standard, couldn't possibly have known we needed to provide historical justification!" The problem is, that is exactly what Heller demanded. So, CA9 is giving the state a do over based on a complete and concerted misrepresentation of Heller. This shit should have been settled at the District Court shortly after Heller. But instead, we'll get to ride the gun control train all the way back to SCOTUS. Again.
At which point scotus will tell’em to get with the program and ca9 will ignore it again. I don’t see a mechanism to enforce scotus rulings. That simply means courts have realized scotus has no real authority. That is a serious problem in my view.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: California standard-capacity mag ban challenge--Duncan v. Bonta

438
sikacz wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 1:54 pm
featureless wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 1:50 pm The problem is CA9 will take any justification proffered by AG Bonta. The state is _screaming_ "new standard, couldn't possibly have known we needed to provide historical justification!" The problem is, that is exactly what Heller demanded. So, CA9 is giving the state a do over based on a complete and concerted misrepresentation of Heller. This shit should have been settled at the District Court shortly after Heller. But instead, we'll get to ride the gun control train all the way back to SCOTUS. Again.
At which point scotus will tell’em to get with the program and ca9 will ignore it again. I don’t see a mechanism to enforce scotus rulings. That simply means courts have realized scotus has no real authority. That is a serious problem in my view.
Kind of like half the country not believing in election results. Government and law rely heavily on faith in the system.

Re: California standard-capacity mag ban challenge--Duncan v. Bonta

439
featureless wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 2:13 pm
sikacz wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 1:54 pm
featureless wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 1:50 pm The problem is CA9 will take any justification proffered by AG Bonta. The state is _screaming_ "new standard, couldn't possibly have known we needed to provide historical justification!" The problem is, that is exactly what Heller demanded. So, CA9 is giving the state a do over based on a complete and concerted misrepresentation of Heller. This shit should have been settled at the District Court shortly after Heller. But instead, we'll get to ride the gun control train all the way back to SCOTUS. Again.
At which point scotus will tell’em to get with the program and ca9 will ignore it again. I don’t see a mechanism to enforce scotus rulings. That simply means courts have realized scotus has no real authority. That is a serious problem in my view.
Kind of like half the country not believing in election results. Government and law rely heavily on faith in the system.
Yes. We’re in a lot trouble as a country.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: California standard-capacity mag ban challenge--Duncan v. Bonta

442
Lifetime federal judicial appointments. After so many years on active status, they can take senior status and their caseload goes down (to about 20% of an active caseload), but their staff isn't reduced. No mandatory retirement age, so they can stay until they die.

Not surprised the 9th en banc panel remanded this case back to the district court, the 9th did the same thing with Miller v Bonta. It's taken George Young (Young v Hawaii) about 10 years for his case to play yoyo - up the courts to SCOTUS and back down again. Hawaii counties have revised their concealed carry licensing requirement, but we'll see if it's really different.
https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2022/09/0 ... -gun-laws/
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: California standard-capacity mag ban challenge--Duncan v. Bonta

445
featureless wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 5:55 pm
highdesert wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 5:28 pm Not surprised the 9th en banc panel remanded this case back to the district court, the 9th did the same thing with Miller v Bonta.
Not surprised, either. Just very frustrated with CA9's behavior. It's no less corrupt than the "other side."
Agree.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: California standard-capacity mag ban challenge--Duncan v. Bonta

448
From the court of St Benitez as he's called in some circles (US District Judge Roger Benitez).
Because millions of removable firearm magazines able to hold between 10 and 30 rounds are commonly owned by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, including self-defense, and because they are reasonably related to service in the militia, the magazines are presumptively within the protection of the Second Amendment. There is no American history or tradition of regulating firearms based on the number of rounds they can shoot, or of regulating the amount of ammunition that can be kept and carried. The best analogue that can be drawn from historical gun laws are the early militia equipment regulations that required all able-bodied citizens to equip themselves with a gun and a minimum amount of ammunition in excess of 10 rounds.
If the 9th Circuit hasn't imposed a stay by the 11th day, then it's open season.

It started as Duncan v Becerra and won in Benitez's court, it won in a 9th Circuit panel decision, but lost at a 9th Circuit en banc. Duncan sought and won cert from SCOTUS and the en banc ruling was vacated and remanded back to the 9th Circuit. A panel of the 9th Circuit then sent it back to Benitez in SDCA. It's back at the 9th a little over a year after SCOTUS GVR'd the case back to them.

We'll see what the 9th does post-Bruen.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests