Euler Posted December 1, 2021 at 11:49 PM Share Posted December 1, 2021 at 11:49 PM Decision The original topic is locked. The 9th Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned the previous ruling of its 3-judge panel that declared California's ban on magazines over 10 rounds unconstitutional. In other words, California's ban still stands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted December 2, 2021 at 06:38 AM Share Posted December 2, 2021 at 06:38 AM (edited) We really need the Supreme Court to establish strict scrutiny on any 2nd infringments, the fact that this court ruled basically saying "We don't think you need a magazine over 10 rounds for self defense, thus we can outlaw them" in regards to a protected right is absurb, they once again lowered the right to a privilege. My hope is the Supreme Court puts an end to this nonsense sooner than later, the fact that a case like this is one step away from the Supreme Court after Heller ruled the 2nd an individual right is IMO nothing but the lower courts ignoring Heller because the Supreme Court neglected to establish a scrutiny level. Edited December 2, 2021 at 06:39 AM by Flynn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweeper13 Posted December 2, 2021 at 01:30 PM Share Posted December 2, 2021 at 01:30 PM (edited) Roberts enjoys getting slapped around from the 9th circuit. He wont use the safe word, he wants more and likes it. Nothing will be done to them. Edited December 2, 2021 at 01:31 PM by Sweeper13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted December 22, 2021 at 04:38 PM Share Posted December 22, 2021 at 04:38 PM https://crpa.org/news/alert/breaking-stay-of-mandate-in-duncan-case-granted/ BREAKING! Stay of Mandate in Duncan Case Granted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted December 22, 2021 at 07:40 PM Author Share Posted December 22, 2021 at 07:40 PM CRPA said: ... With this Stay of Mandate granted by the court, it essentially means everything carries on as it has for the past several years. Those individual who lawfully own or possess magazines holding more than 10 rounds are allowed to keep them while the case is appealed. Owners are allowed to keep them (for now), but not buy more (unless they travel out of California, I guess). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiliconSorcerer Posted December 23, 2021 at 02:30 PM Share Posted December 23, 2021 at 02:30 PM On 12/22/2021 at 1:40 PM, Euler said: Owners are allowed to keep them (for now), but not buy more (unless they travel out of California, I guess). Or discover the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted December 23, 2021 at 07:30 PM Author Share Posted December 23, 2021 at 07:30 PM On 12/23/2021 at 9:30 AM, SiliconSorcerer said: Or discover the internet. No retailers who weren't shipping during the previous ban are going to ship to CA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted December 24, 2021 at 07:28 AM Share Posted December 24, 2021 at 07:28 AM On 12/23/2021 at 1:30 PM, Euler said: No retailers who weren't shipping during the previous ban are going to ship to CA. That is what mail forwarding services are for... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiliconSorcerer Posted December 24, 2021 at 03:01 PM Share Posted December 24, 2021 at 03:01 PM On 12/24/2021 at 1:28 AM, Flynn said: That is what mail forwarding services are for... I reship and receive from all over the world, I try to keep contacts on every continent. Unfortunately there's thing called age catching up on all of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mab22 Posted December 24, 2021 at 07:24 PM Share Posted December 24, 2021 at 07:24 PM On 12/24/2021 at 1:28 AM, Flynn said: That is what mail forwarding services are for... NICE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texasgrillchef Posted March 8, 2022 at 02:50 PM Share Posted March 8, 2022 at 02:50 PM The case has moved to the US Supreme Court. Duncan v Bonta 21-1194 https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/21-1194.html i would also like to mention that another Magazine case ANJRPC v Platkin (NJ) Is pending with SCOTUS. It is currently “on hold” pending the NYSPRA v Bruen case. https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20-1507.html Due to timing, with deadlines and possible extensions to file various briefs. An Opinion on NYSPRA v Bruen case will likely be issued prior to Duncan even being scheduled for a conference. Even though that case has nothing to do with magazine bans, it is well expected that the opinion will make some comment on the use of scrutiny etc. why else would the ANJRPC case be put into a holding pattern? That case from NJ will have an impact on Duncan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted March 8, 2022 at 11:59 PM Author Share Posted March 8, 2022 at 11:59 PM On 3/8/2022 at 9:50 AM, Texasgrillchef said: ... i would also like to mention that another Magazine case ANJRPC v Platkin (NJ) Is pending with SCOTUS. It is currently “on hold” pending the NYSPRA v Bruen case. https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20-1507.html ... We have a thread on 20-1507 at ANJRPC v NJ - Magazine size limits & seizures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted June 30, 2022 at 03:18 PM Author Share Posted June 30, 2022 at 03:18 PM As 21-1194: Petition granted, judgment vacated, remanded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now