9th Overturned CA Standard Magazine Ban

[Subdeacon Joe]

Buy 'em while you can.

 

https://www.whsv.com/2020/08/14/9th-circuit-ends-california-ban-on-high-capacity-magazines/

 

Published: Aug. 14, 2020 at 10:43 AM PDT|Updated: 2 hours ago

 

 

 

 

 

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday threw out California's ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines, saying the law violates the U.S. Constitution's protection of the right to bear firearms.

“Even well-intentioned laws must pass constitutional muster,” appellate Judge Kenneth Lee wrote for the panel’s majority. California’s ban on magazines holding more than 10 bullets “strikes at the core of the Second Amendment — the right to armed self-defense.”

He noted that California passed the law “in the wake of heart-wrenching and highly publicized mass shootings,” but said that isn’t enough to justify a ban whose scope “is so sweeping that half of all magazines in America are now unlawful to own in California.”

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra did not immediately say if he would ask the full appellate court to reconsider the ruling by the three judges, or if he would appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

Amazing!

 

Now, if they'd just do the same for the onerous and far worse, in my opinion, ammunition buying hurdles.   

[Crazy Gun Barney, SASS #2428]

Tried, most places are still waiting for their lawyers to review the ruling and allow them to sell.  Once everybody gets on board, I imagine they will all sell out quickly.

 

CDNN told me straight out that no matter what the courts here say, they will not sell regular capacity mags to CA because "they will just get banned again in a week like last time".  I unsubscribed from their mailing list....

[Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619]

9th Circuit moves in correct direction? Very gratifying. It's a start, anyway.

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

Becerra must be munching Tums like peanuts 'bout now; tantrum to follow.  

[Utah Bob #35998]

They must have sumthin up their sleeves. And them judges robes have dang big sleeves.

Remain on watch.

[Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438]

Look at it as a progression.  The intermediate steps cannot be skipped.  We need an appropriate case raising the discrete issue of the magazine ban (done); then we need a 9th Circuit favorable decision (done); then we need an appeal to the US Supreme Court (likely); then an acceptance of that appeal by the Court (probable); and then, after briefing and a hearing, a favorable Supreme Court decision (hopefully).  

 

Only then will the decision carry its full weight in CA, and most significantly for the rest of us, the power of a US Supreme Court precedent across the country.

 

Now get out and vote in November for a candidate that supports the 2nd Amendment and will appoint more original intent judges.

 

LL

 

 

[Subdeacon Joe]

1 minute ago, Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438 said:

then an acceptance of that appeal by the Court (probable

 

Or the Court could refuse cert when CA DoJ appeals,  which lets the decision stand.

[Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438]

7 minutes ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

 

Or the Court could refuse cert when CA DoJ appeals,  which lets the decision stand.

 

Selfishly, I want to see a decision that binds the Federal Courts in my state; not just a 9th Circuit decision left undisturbed by the Supremes.  

 

The 1st circuit still has 3 Obama appointees and 2 Clinton appointees; that's too many to assure a favorable outcome on the next 2nd Amendment case in the 1st Circuit in the absence of a binding Supreme Court precedent.  We need a good Supreme Court decision and/or more Trump judicial appointments in the 1st Circuit.

 

LL

[Subdeacon Joe]

6 minutes ago, Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438 said:

Selfishly, I want to see a decision that binds the Federal Courts in my state; not just a 9th Circuit decision left undisturbed by the Supremes.  

 

Good point. Something to be wished for indeed. I wish they would take it and issue a broad ruling,  "It means what it says,  "The right of the people....shall not be infringed.   Period."

 

 

But given the recent history of the Court on 2nd Amendment cases, I don't hold much hope for them granting Becerra cert in this. 

[Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933]

I am sure the California DOJ will ask for a rehearing en banc.  There should be enough leftists on the entire 9th Circuit to overrule the 3 judge panel.  In the meantime they will probably leave the ban in effect until the appeals are exhausted.

[Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438]

3 minutes ago, Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933 said:

I am sure the California DOJ will ask for a rehearing en banc.  There should be enough leftists on the entire 9th Circuit to overrule the 3 judge panel.  In the meantime they will probably leave the ban in effect until the appeals are exhausted.

 

Gee...and I was feelin' bright and hopeful for about 15 minutes; i should have known better.  

 

LL

[Sedalia Dave]

9 minutes ago, Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933 said:

I am sure the California DOJ will ask for a rehearing en banc.  There should be enough leftists on the entire 9th Circuit to overrule the 3 judge panel.  In the meantime they will probably leave the ban in effect until the appeals are exhausted.

 

4 minutes ago, Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438 said:

 

Gee...and I was feelin' bright and hopeful for about 15 minutes; i should have known better.  

 

LL

 

Don't worry if that happens CRPA, SAF, GOA, FPC and others will continue the fight. 

 

Makes me sick that the NRA is conspicuously absent from this and similar battles.  

[Crazy Gun Barney, SASS #2428]

Last time, we had a week to order and buy what we wanted before the ban was slammed back down again.  The joy of that one week was that it made everything we may have acquired during the years of the ban (not that anybody would have done that) perfectly legal to own because if anybody asks, we bought them during the "magic week".

 

Hopefully, it will last a little longer this time.  When they lifted the mail order ammo ban, I think that only lasted a day or so before it came crashing back down again.

[John Kloehr]

6 minutes ago, Sedalia Dave said:

 

 

Don't worry if that happens CRPA, SAF, GOA, FPC and others will continue the fight. 

 

Makes me sick that the NRA is conspicuously absent from this and similar battles.  

The NRA-ILA has been all over this from the beginning.

[John Kloehr]

1 hour ago, Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438 said:

Look at it as a progression.  The intermediate steps cannot be skipped.  We need an appropriate case raising the discrete issue of the magazine ban (done); then we need a 9th Circuit favorable decision (done); then we need an appeal to the US Supreme Court (likely); then an acceptance of that appeal by the Court (probable); and then, after briefing and a hearing, a favorable Supreme Court decision (hopefully).  

 

1 hour ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

Or the Court could refuse cert when CA DoJ appeals,  which lets the decision stand.

 

1 hour ago, Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438 said:

Selfishly, I want to see a decision that binds the Federal Courts in my state; not just a 9th Circuit decision left undisturbed by the Supremes.  

 

25 minutes ago, Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933 said:

I am sure the California DOJ will ask for a rehearing en banc.

A request for en banc makes sense. But an appeal to SCOTUS likely won't get accepted unless (until) there is a clear conflicting decision from another circuit court. Then The Supremes may decide to resolve the conflict between rulings which will be binding on the entire nation.

 

I need to read the current ruling to have more than this speculation for the future path. The exact wording in it and the reasoning outlined in it will give me a better sense of future possible actions.

[John Kloehr]

2 hours ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

Buy 'em while you can.

Not yet, the stay on the original San Diego ruling is still in effect.

 

But I did find a link to today's actual ruling:

 

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2020/08/14/19-55376.pdf

 

Might have time to read it on Sunday. It is a bit long.

[Subdeacon Joe]

2 hours ago, John Kloehr said:

Not yet, the stay on the original San Diego ruling is still in effect.

 

But I did find a link to today's actual ruling:

 

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2020/08/14/19-55376.pdf

 

Might have time to read it on Sunday. It is a bit long.

 

Some places are already taking orders and shipping.

[Subdeacon Joe]

3 hours ago, John Kloehr said:

Not yet, the stay on the original San Diego ruling is still in effect.

 

Quote

We AFFIRM the district court’s grant of summary judgment for plaintiffs-appellees.

 

Since the district court ruled it unconstitutional and overturned the bad, wouldn't this ruling then automatically end the stay?

[Crazy Gun Barney, SASS #2428]

I can neither confirm nor deny that somebody named Me has placed an order and received a confirmation from a company that sounds like a color.... 

 

now the wait to see if I get a shipping confirmation....

[Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619]

4 minutes ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

 

 

Since the district court ruled it unconstitutional and overturned the bad, wouldn't this ruling then automatically end the stay?

 

Nothing is automatic. They will need to lift the stay.

[Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984]

How do they choose the three judge panels?

[John Kloehr]

I see many sites are taking orders and apparently shipping standard-capacity magazines to California. I have not seen reports of the stay rescinded.

 

In theory (IANAL), since the legal processes are not exhausted, this is still in effect:

 

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Order-Staying-Prop-63-Judgment.pdf

 

Quote

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Judgment is stayed in part pending final resolution of the appeal from the Judgment. The permanent injunction enjoining enforcement of California Penal Code § 32310 (a) and (b) is hereby stayed, effective 5:00 p.m., Friday, April 5, 2019.

 

 

But some may interpret the ruling by the 9th as "final." Maybe some of them are lawyers.