What was their “reason” for ruling one way and two years later ruling another way?
What was their “reason” for ruling one way and two years later ruling another way?
The first ruling was by a three judge panel (the usual way to hear a case). One of the more conservative judges was the Chief Justice at the time.
The second ruling occurred after a very liberal became Chief Justice (they rotate). The case was asked to go to be heard “en banc” by the whole Ninth Circuit.
In the en banc hearing, the Ninth reversed the earlier ruling (and did a lousy job, IMHO).
http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2016/06/ninth-circuit-rules-on-peruta-no-right.html