This Ping List is for all things pertaining to the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Posted on 07/17/2018 3:58:48 PM PDT by PROCON
FAIRFAX, Va. -- A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit issued a ruling in the case of Duncan v. Becerra on Tuesday upholding a lower court’s decision to suspend enforcement of California’s restriction on the possession of magazines that hold 10 rounds or more.
“This is a significant win for law-abiding gun owners in California,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director, National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action. “This unconstitutional law criminalizes mere possession of many standard capacity magazines and would instantly turn many law-abiding gun owners into criminals.”
California Rifle and Pistol Association lawyers, with the support of the NRA, sought an injunction against the magazine possession ban, arguing the law violated the Second Amendment as well as Americans’ due process rights. A federal district court judge agreed and issued a preliminary injunction before the law was set to go into effect. California appealed the decision.
On Tuesday, the 9th Circuit upheld the injunction.
Meanwhile, in the trial court, a motion for summary judgment is pending and a ruling on the merits of the case is expected soon. Regardless of the outcome, the case will most certainly be appealed again to the 9th Circuit. By that time, the Supreme Court will likely have a new justice who respects the right to keep and bear arms as protected by the Second Amendment.
“Tuesday’s ruling was a step in the right direction. The National Rifle Association will continue to fight for the rights of Californians to protect themselves,” Cox concluded.
I'm shocked though that the 9th Circuit court ruled in favor of the 2nd Amendment.
This Ping List is for all things pertaining to the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
bookmark
That’s another win for the rule of law. I’m surprised but very pleased.
The 9th Circuit is correctly reading the 2nd Amendment and recent USSC decisions and should be given credit accordingly.
Oh, and thank you God for giving us a President like Donald Trump!
Elsewise this same court would ban staple guns.
WINNING even in California!
correct me if Im wrong...
If california does not appeal the ruling it becomes law
if they appeal and loose at the supreme court level it become permanent law..so due to liberal over reach once again we have checkmate?
Ramifications for the other states? NY has an almost identical ban, Colorado has a 15 round limit.
...Elsewise this same court would ban staple guns...
Nail guns too. Semiautomatic and the magazine holds more than 10 rounds.
The Ninth Circus? Wow.
Ya the 9th actually decided based on the rule of law, not based on the liberal view of an issue. Good going.
9th Circuit has gotten a bit more normal since the pornographer judge left the bench.
I don't understand the law well enough to know if the 9th circuit's ruling will affect other jurisdictions.
I'll correct you, then.
This was just on the temporary injunction. The lower court still has to make a determination on the merits of a permanent injunction.
Basically 3 levels in seeking to enjoin something:
Temporary Restraining Order - generally granted ex-parte to prevent immediate, irreversible harm
Temporary injunction - as here, to maintain the status quo until there can be a full determination on the merits
Permanent injunction - following full trial on the merits, prohibits forever the conduct sought to be enjoined.
Thank you...
“I’m shocked though that the 9th Circuit court ruled in favor of the 2nd Amendment. “
Oddly, they’ve done so several times.
The answer to your question is ‘no’ for two reasons.
First, this is just a preliminary injunction, not a final determination by the trial court that was the subject of the appeal.
Second, Colorado is in the 10th Circuit and New York is in the 2nd. So the 9th Circuit could be argued as persuasive, but it certainly wouldn’t be binding as to either state.
Scared of zombies.
“NY has an almost identical ban, Colorado has a 15 round limit”
They are not covered by the 9th circuit.
Any disagreement between the 9th circuit and their circuit court would have to be resolved by the USSC.
However, this is just a preliminary injunction. The ruling on the merits is pending.
But it’s a good sign as to where the circuit is headed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.