Author Topic: Ninth Circuit Vacates California Magazine Ban Decision  (Read 388 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
Ninth Circuit Vacates California Magazine Ban Decision
« on: February 26, 2021, 04:27:05 pm »
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has moved to vacate the decision of a three judge panel that ruled California’s ban on the acquisition and possession of ammunition magazines that can hold more than ten rounds violated the Second Amendment, granting a motion to rehear the case with a broader pool of judges in an opinion released Thursday afternoon.

While on the surface this may look like bad news, it’s not unexpected. Virtually every pro-Second Amendment opinion coming out of the Ninth Circuit is reheard by an en banc panel, and plaintiffs in this case, known as Duncan vs. Becerra, have been waiting for months for the court to make official what everyone suspected; anti-gun judges on the court want a re-do in the hopes of overturning the decision.

Quote
The federal lawsuit was filed in 2017 by the California Rifle and Pistol Association — the state arm of the National Rifle Association — and five San Diego County residents.

 They were opposing two 2016 state laws: a bill passed by the Legislature making it illegal to own magazines that hold 10 or more bullets, as well as a voter-passed ballot measure that requires people to get rid of such magazines they already own or face being charged with a misdemeanor or infraction.

A 2000 law already makes it illegal to sell or buy such magazines.

The lawsuit argued the new laws infringe on the constitutional right to bear arms. Three of the plaintiffs said they wanted the magazines for self-defense while two others said they shouldn’t have to give up magazines they already own.

U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez sided with the gun owners, saying in a strongly worded opinion that the law “turns millions of responsible, law-abiding people trying to protect themselves into criminals.”

The state attorney general’s office appealed, and the district court’s decision was upheld. The majority opinion, penned by Judge Kenneth K. Lee, found the law “runs afoul of the Second Amendment,” particularly the right to armed self-defense.

Judge Barbara Lynn dissented, finding that the law “does not place a substantial burden on core Second Amendment rights because it does not prevent the use of handguns or other weapons in self-defense.”

The attorney general petitioned for the en banc hearing, arguing that the ruling conflicted with other court decisions.

“This case involves a question of exceptional importance, affecting the safety of every Californian,” the state argued in its petition.

<snip>

California Rifle and Pistol Association president and general counsel Chuck Michel tells Bearing Arms that the organization is “excited to have another opportunity to defend what Californians already know – law-abiding citizens’ ability to purchase, possess, and use standard-capacity magazines in California is a fundamental civil right and shall not be infringed.”

Regardless of what the en banc panel decides, this case is ultimately bound for the Supreme Court. The en banc review, however, means that any possibility of the Court taking the case this year is slim to none, because the Ninth Circuit also has a history of dragging its feet in releasing its en banc opinions in Second Amendment cases.

https://bearingarms.com/camedwards/2021/02/25/ninth-circuit-vacates-california-magazine-ban-decision-n41493
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!