Texasgrillchef
Active Member
That presumes their motives are in support of the common good, at least in their hoplophobic world views. Based on reading prior decisions, I think there's an awful lot of "If something bad happens, I don't want to be responsible" line of thinking. In that case, finding in favor of the law and letting SCOTUS do the final takedown allows 9CA to avoid feeling responsible for what they think the results will be.
Even if Duncan doesn't become national precedent, it will be persuasive in other circuits.
Thats what the big question is…. Really…. Will CA9 want to avoid any blame and let it go to SCOTUS so they can be blamed even if the ruling opinion SCOTUS issues is harsh….
Or will they want to curb the damage? IF they do find in favor of Duncan and try to limit some of the damage, will CA fall back or will they go ahead and try to risk it?
See I don’t think California will risk it if CA9 finds in favor of Duncan. Duncan however, will without any doubt take it to SCOTUS. If CA9 doesn’t issue an opinion SCOTUS likes or approves and Duncan files alone Petition. Statistically Speaking GVR cases that end up back in front of SCOTUS are 98% likely to be found for the original petitioner. In this case Duncan.
My guess is CA9 won’t want to let it go to SCOTUS. But you could be just as right in they will let it go to SCOTUS for them to take the blame.
After thinking about it awhile….. it will depend on timing and how it falls in line with elections. Will it be where a SCOTUS decision would come before or after presidential elections.