CatSnoutSoup
NES Member
Today, Miller v Bonta the CA assault weapons ban has once again been ruled unconstitutional.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
California's "High Capacity" Magazine Ban Overturned!
- Thread starter peter_nh
- Start date
CatSnoutSoup
NES Member
I predicted a couple weeks ago that Benitez had the second case completed, and was going to jam it up the 9th circuit’s ass along with the magazine ban case.
Benitez also issued a 10-day stay. Bonta will appeal to the 9th, which will either find for the state in the panel or an en banc.Today, Miller v Bonta the CA assault weapons ban has once again been ruled unconstitutional.
He didn’t really jam anything though, it still took a good amount of time after Duncan was released before this came out, and he still stayed his order for 10 days to give CA time to appeal. If he really want to jam it, he would have pulled another Freedom Week.I predicted a couple weeks ago that Benitez had the second case completed, and was going to jam it up the 9th circuit’s ass along with the magazine ban case.
CatSnoutSoup
NES Member
The stay was a given, California appealing is a given, the 9th circuit extending the stay is also going to be a given. And my guess is it is also a given that ultimately this all returns to SCOTUS with ridiculous references to inappropriate historical precedent and new attempts at interest balancing, which will be countered by Benitez’s thorough ruling.
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2020
- Messages
- 1,781
- Likes
- 2,051
Necro much?
GL2020
NES Member
This is still an active issue in the 9th. I believe the 9th heard it enbanc and stayed the order (basically making mags over 10 rounds prohibited again).
This will likely go back to scotus who (IMO) will rightly ask them what part of GVR they did not understand. I have to wonder if the 9th is stalling hoping for a change in the court and daring them to overrule them.
This from courthouse News:
“There’s no serious engagement with the Second Amendment’s text,” Bumatay writes about the majority’s decision. “No grappling with historical analogues. No putting California to its burden of proving the constitutionality of its law. All we get is a summary order, even after the Supreme Court directly ordered us to apply Bruen to this very case. The Constitution and Californians deserve better.”
In a dissent almost six times longer than the decision, Bumatay said the majority has again treated the Second Amendment as inferior to the others. The appeals court on multiple occasions has allowed violations to Californians’ right to bear arms, and did it again on Tuesday when it failed to properly examine the case’s merits, he wrote.
“Enough should be enough,” Bumatay wrote.
Ninth Circuit issues partial stay in California large-capacity gun magazine case
The four dissenting judges railed against the majority decision, calling the Ninth Circuit's attitude about the Second Amendment
www.courthousenews.com
Lank
NES Member
Agreed. Meaningless commentary I know.
