I was hoping they would decline and it could more quickly get routed to SCOTUS.
https://news.yahoo.com/u-court-reconsider-california-ban-200903131.html
https://news.yahoo.com/u-court-reconsider-california-ban-200903131.html
I thought they decided in this awhile back. Maybe they just issued a stay?
He, and Kava-naught! So much for being a *staunch Conservative* in either case.If Roberts gets out of the way and isn't blackmailed by the Dims, we would have a good chance.
Well, sorta:I think the 9th Circuit was one of the Circuits that Trump was able to flip by getting conservatives judges approved
Democratic appointees still make up the majority of active judges — 16 to 13. But the court also has judges on “senior status” who continue to sit on panels that decide cases. Senior-status rank gives judges more flexibility but allows them to continue to work, even full time.
Of the senior judges who will be deciding cases on “merits” panels — reading briefs and issuing rulings — 10 are Republicans and only three are Democratic appointees, Smith said.
State of CA applied for the en banc to appeal the 3 judge ruling.I was hoping they would decline and it could more quickly get routed to SCOTUS.
16 DUNCAN V.BECERRA
ANALYSIS
The state of California5 argues that the district court erred by granting summary judgment for the Owners. We disagree with the government’s position, and we affirm. California Penal Code section 32310 severely burdens the core of the constitutional right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. The statute is a poor means to accomplish the state’s interests and cannot survive strict scrutiny. But even if we applied intermediate scrutiny, the law would still fail.
The Second Amendment is a fundamental right rooted in both text and tradition.The Second Amendment provides: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” U.S. Const. amend. II. In 2008, the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment protects “an individual right to keep and bear arms.” Heller, 554 U.S. at 595. The Court later incorporated the Second Amendment to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742, 767 (2010). A citizen’s right to self-defense, the Court held, 5 This opinion will also use the terms “the state” or “the government” to refer to the Defendant-Appellant. 6 We note that the district court’s “simple Heller test” conflicts with our court’s two-step inquiry framework for the Second Amendment. See infra at II.A. We are aware of the criticism that the two-step test “appears to be entirely made up” and that “its application has yielded analyses that are entirely inconsistent with Heller.” Rogers v. Grewal, 590 U.S. ___ at 3 (June 15, 2020) (Thomas, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari). But we must follow this court’s precedent.
Pretty much expected them to rehear it. Looks like they have decided to.
It will be interesting to see if CA looses if they want to try to take it higher.
It is my understanding if we loose California Rifle and Pistol Association intends to try to take it to SCOTUS, if that happens I hope they take the case.
Bad news if we were to go to SCOTUS and loose but sooner or later this needs to be decided.
Potentially.A single case that contained both assault weapons ban and high capacity magazines would be a better case, no?
A single case that contained both assault weapons ban and high capacity magazines would be a better case, no?
The Circuit Courts develop their own "leanings" often without regard to the Party of who appointed them.I believe we get the Chief Judge, So that's one against before we even have the other 10. (assuming party line vote)
It will be interesting to see if it splits on party who appointed the Justice, maybe maybe not but likely.
Not necessarily. Different Circuits commonly have opposing judicial stances on issues.If the 9th federal circuit court decides against the California ban on standard capacity magazines after the Vermont State Supreme Court has upheld that state's over-10 round ban, does that kick the ball to the US Supreme Court's court?
The Opinion uses LCM (large capacity magazine) as a "term-of-art," a singular definition within the argument for the purposes of brevity. It does not impose any legal definition upon the term in question.I think they mean 'standard capacity' magazines.
Hawaii took the open carry case before the 9th last year or so and got trounced, thats going to en banc as well tho i dont know when.Hawaii is in the 9th, so this would ripple right through them as well, many court challenges to be sure, so even if we win, wouldn't Hawaii challenge it as it upsets their applecart pretty thoroughly?
@TheBruce - Arf went nuts during that week - all standard cap mag sales were redirected to CA residents, and many mags were gifted to CA residents. It was a glorious show indeed.