Judge on Ninth Circuit calls for vote on en banc review of Peruta

Gun Watch ^ | 5 December, 2014 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

In the ongoing saga of Peruta v. County of San Diego, another procedural turn; a judge on the Ninth Circuit has called for a vote to determine if the Circuit will hear the case en banc.   This is a call for a vote to review the original decision, not to hear the appeal of the denial of the request to intervene by Attorney General Kamala Harris of California.  Here is the Order, from the pdf:

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, THOMAS, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

A judge of this Court having made a sua sponte call for a vote on whether this case should be reheard en banc, the parties shall file, within 21 days from the date of this order, simultaneous briefs setting forth their respective positions on whether this case should be reheard en banc. See G.O. 5.4(c)(3). Amici curiae wishing to file briefs regarding whether this case should be reheard en banc may also do so within 21 days from the date of this order.

It is unknown how soon the vote on whether to hear the case en banc will occur after the briefs are received.

Peruta is the case in the Ninth Circuit that agreed that the second amendment protects a right to be armed outside the home, and that the government may not ban both open and concealed carry of arms.  Peruta has already had far reaching consequences, being cited in cases involving Hawaii, the District of Columbia, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Northern Mariana Islands, and sparked legislation in Guam.

 ©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

[marktwain]

My belief is that if Peruta stands, the second amendment wins the culture war, and then the legislative war, and then the jurisprudence war.

If Peruta stands,California and Hawaii become shall issue. Probably a million more CCW permits. That many more permits means it is an irreversable step for California and Hawaii. No state has ever reversed a shall issue law.

Then all you have left is a tiny cluster of East Coast states centered around New York, with the Congress voting national reciprocity into law. That cluster will not be able to stand haveing everyone but their own citizens being able to bear arms outside the home, in their own states.

[Clump]

Also, I noticed that the three judge panel in this case is made up of appointees from Reagan, G.W. Bush, and Clinton.
Thomas is the Clinton appointee and he was the dissenter.
The left definitely has the numbers to reverse the panel, but like I said before, they would be taking an unnecessary risk given the trend by the other circuits and the potential for SCOTUS to reverse them, thus creating national precedent.
Here’s to hoping they decline review.

[marktwain]

I hope so too. I wonder what the procedures are for a vote? There must be procedures and a time limit.

Also, if they fail to accept this case for en banc, it seems highly unlikely that they will accept Prieto, from another county, or Baker, from Hawaii.

That will still leave the possibility of an appeal to the Supreme Court, but it would be to reverse Peruta, not uphold it. A significant difference.