James Miller vs Rob Bonta, California AWB challenge

[starwatcher]

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/5381/attachments/original/1622850515/Miller_v_Bonta_Opinion.pdf?1622850515

 

I didn't see a thread on this, lock if its already posted.

 

Basically, Judge ruled Heller protects AR-15's.

[Euler]

... in Federal District court of Southern CA. Expect an appeal to CA9.

[Flynn]

There are some heads spinning now... Sadly CA9 is fully anti-gun and will almost certainly reverse the decission.

 

The question is how much longer can the Supreme Court ignore further defining the 2nd and allow a patchwork of different 2nd rights by zip code?

[BobPistol]

Like the Swiss Army Knife, the popular AR-15 rifle is a perfect combination of home defense weapon and homeland defense equipment. Good for both home and battle, the AR-15 is the kind of versatile gun that lies at the intersection of the kinds of firearms protected under District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) and United States v Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)

 

 

How much you wanna bet the judge has at least one of them?

[cybermgk]

... in Federal District court of Southern CA. Expect an appeal to CA9.

In CA right now

 

"Well, it's a free for all, and I heard it said

You can bet your life

Stakes are high and so am I

It's in the air tonight"

 

-Ted Nugent, Free For All

[mikew]

 

Like the Swiss Army Knife, the popular AR-15 rifle is a perfect combination of home defense weapon and homeland defense equipment. Good for both home and battle, the AR-15 is the kind of versatile gun that lies at the intersection of the kinds of firearms protected under District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) and United States v Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)

 

 

How much you wanna bet the judge has at least one of them?

 

One of each!

[Gamma]

 

Like the Swiss Army Knife, the popular AR-15 rifle is a perfect combination of home defense weapon and homeland defense equipment. Good for both home and battle, the AR-15 is the kind of versatile gun that lies at the intersection of the kinds of firearms protected under District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) and United States v Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)

 

 

How much you wanna bet the judge has at least one of them?

 

Firearm intersectionality

[DoYouFeelLucky]

Where do my MSR's that identify as single shot bolt action rifles fall in this? Asking for a friend.

[Plinkermostly]

CNN:

9th Circuit Appeals Court blocks the overturn of California's assault weapons ban

 

 

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/21/politics/california-assault-style-weapons-ban-overturn-blocked/index.html

 

 

 

 

Surprise???

[bmyers]

How is it that they can hear case like this so quickly, yet others take years to be heard?

[gunuser17]

They didn't hear the case, they heard a motion to stay the district court's order while the appeal was pending. As a result the 9th Circuit put this new case on hold while they decide a very similar case that has already been briefed. As I expect, once the 9th Circuit rules in the older case that the ban is ok, they will remand this new case to the district court telling that court to now take into account the expected decision in the older case. In total, they can then defer dealing with this new Benitez decision for a couple of years at least.

[BobPistol]

How is it that they can hear case like this so quickly, yet others take years to be heard?

 

LWW-ism moves fast, the constitution moves slow.

[mrmagloo]

It's amazing to me that the Bill of Rights is supposed to be beyond reproach and shall not EVER be infringed. However, when politicians clearly design legislation to breach those rights, the entire judicial system plays this game to allow this infringement to exist for months, years, and in some cases decades, until it's convenient to address and it "works" through the system.

 

That a bunch of BS in my mind. The state of Illinois and a few others has crafted an art of gaming the system and playing the cat and mouse game, specifically trying to push the boundaries, and going past, and figuring they will at least have their time in the sun for the duration. This should never be possible.

 

Imho, those who infringe on core individual rights, and those that allow the continuation, should be PERSONALLY responsible and liable for the contributing act for trampling these very important rights. This is F'd up.

[Smallbore]

Our courts for decades have used their power to usurp our constitution, to usurp liberty. They use their power to protect the increasing power of a dictatorial government. The "states interest" out weights personal liberty. Marxist through and through.