Hanson v DC - Magazine ban

[Euler]

On April 20, 2023, the District Court for DC denied Hanson a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of DC's ban of magazines with a capacity over 10 rounds.

On October 29, the Appeals Court for DC denied Hanson a preliminary injunction.

On January 16, 2025, Hanson requested an extension to the deadline to file a petition to the US Supreme Court. (shadow docket)

On January 23, Justice Roberts extended the deadline to February 26.

[Euler]

On February 26, Hanson filed the petition. The response is due by March 31. (docket)

Petition for certiorari said:

...
In this case, a divided D.C. Circuit panel held that magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds of ammunition are arms "in common use" for lawful purposes, but it nonetheless concluded that the District may categorically ban them because they are "particularly dangerous," analogous to Bowie knives and fully automatic machine guns.

Accordingly, the question presented is:

Whether the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution allows a categorical ban on arms that are indisputably common throughout the United States and overwhelming used for lawful purposes (generally) and self-defense (specifically).
...

Given the case, the question is poorly phrased. The question should ask exactly what the appeals court decided:

If an item is indisputably an arm in common use, can such arms be classified as "particularly dangerous" and banned accordingly?

As an interlocutory appeal, this petition is probably DOA, anyway.

[Euler]

On March 12, DC asked for an extension to respond.

On March 13, the Court extended the deadline to April 30.

[Euler]

On April 30, DC met the deadline to respond.

[Euler]

On May 19, Hanson filed the reply.

[Euler]

Petition denied. (Remember that this petition was for interlocutory appeal.)