Posted on 08/15/2020 9:53:45 AM PDT by Drew68
A major decision was released today by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals regarding the Second Amendment. If you weren’t aware, many states limit magazine capacity, with the most common stipulation being nothing over ten rounds. This has been a roundabout way to try to enforce some level of “gun control” in places like California. It’s also an incredibly arbitrary measure. What makes it constitutional to ban eleven rounds but not nine?
Now we have an answer in the form of it being ruled not constitutional at all.
This ruling has a much wider possible impact than just on magazines. This could also be the precedent to knock down all kinds of arbitrary gun control measures that focus on specific aspects of a weapon.
It should be noted that this will likely go to a full hearing of the 9th Circuit, but it also should be noted that the court is now majority Republican-appointed. If a full hearing brings the same result, then this all but forces Chief Justice John Roberts to stop being a coward and to take this up. Of course, given his previous antics, there’s no guarantee at all Roberts won’t vote with the liberals in any hypothetical ruling on gun rights. To this point, though, the Supreme Court has steadfastly refused to take up any recent Second Amendment cases. With this 9th Circuit ruling so thoroughly quashing a major tool of those trying to set arbitrary limits on firearms, Roberts either has to live with the result, or he has to make a move. We’ll see what he does.
The other thing this ruling does is draw a line in the sand between some of the radical measures Kamala Harris and Joe Biden, if elected, want to take versus what is legally allowed. If having more than ten rounds is constitutional, there’s simply no way a forced gun buyback is going to survive a legal challenge, nor is it likely any “assault weapons ban” would stand. An AR-15 is simply a rifle (and not even an overly powerful one) at the end of the day. While I’d rather Trump just win so we don’t have to wage these battles, it would be interesting to see what a Biden administration would do in the face of this ruling. Watching them get smacked down would certainly be satisfying.
Overall, this is great news for the Constitution and for the rights of Americans everywhere. Lastly, it underscores just how important the Trump presidency and his transformation of the judiciary have been.
Watching them get smacked down would certainly be satisfying.
Watching them succeed would be sobering as
another step toward civil war.
If it’s what they want, they will have it and
more than they can swallow.
The issue with banning any magazine with over ten rounds is this: if you can ban those magazines then you can ban any magazine with more than one round.
Sitting in my SUV on Florida’s Space Coast as I write this...with a Ruger SR40 and two 15 round magazines. Even if they did restrict...I will not comply.
Judge Daniel Collins (9th circuit) goes to our Catholic Church in so cal. He’s one of trumps appointees and is a fierce and clear-thinking conservative. He clerked for. Antonin Scalia early on and said ‘that man only searched for the truth wherever it was to be found.’ We are so encouraged by these two new appointees. The tide is turning.
That's 100% true and that's their seditious intent.
My Browning Hi-Power (P35 - introduced in 1935) came with 13s in the box -- but those magazines have left and now reside with my daughter in a free state.
Any active judge can ask for an en banc vote (to determine if there will be an en banc hearing), in which only the active judges vote. If the vote favors an en banc hearing, 10 active judges are chosen at random to join the (current) Clinton-appointed Chief Judge to hear the case en banc. So to have a strong chance of having a favorable outcome, the random 10-judge draw would have to come up 6 R-appointed and 4 D-appointed.
Yeah, Roberts is about as trustworthy as Schumer these days.
What you are saying is we are likely to lose at the en banc ruling and the SC will not take the cast. This ruling just gives California citizens a few weeks to buy 30 round magazines.
It might be interesting, but it would not be edifying.
First, ignore the ruling.
Then, enlarge the Supreme Court to 15 Justices; add six looney leftists.
Then have the Supreme Court reverse the ruling.
Well; a lot of the states are in the process right now of redefining the FIRST AMENDMENT, including my own unfortunately!
Why stop at one ?
This was posted on Twitter via a Parler account. Have not yet confirmed the validity.
“Whistleblower on new #Epstein tapes shows top Supreme Court Justice was being BLACKMAILED and was seen on various #EpsteinTapes that were recently recovered by investigators.
Guess which one?”
https://twitter.com/April1day/status/1294757667995389952?s=20
Anybody else heard anything about this?
Previously, the opinion had discussed rural citizens that might need to be able to use firearms with large capacity magazines to prevent assault and burglary as police/sheriff response times may be quite long.
Further, some people, especially in communities of color, do not trust law enforcement and are less likely — over 40% less likely, according to one study — to call 911 even during emergencies. See 163 Cong. Rec. S1257-58 (daily ed. Feb. 16, 2017) (statement of Sen. Kamala Harris) (discussing a study showing that certain ethnic groups are over 40% less likely to call 911 in an emergency);
I love the fact that the judge us using the gun grabbing Harris' own words against her in a pro-2nd amendment ruling.
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
The Supreme Court is not unified on this.
They are split, with four justices supporting the Second Amendment and four Justices wanting to gut it.
Roberts has become the swing vote, trending left.
Neither side trusts him, so the Court has been unwilling to take a substantial case for over a decade.
Much now depends on RGB's survival.
Except for Second Amendment cases that favor the Constitution.
Then an en banc hearing seems mandatory.
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.