9th Circuit says Mag Capacity Restrictions Unconstitutional

[press1280]

Just curious, but does this automatically cancel the Hawaii law?

Or would someone like @wolfwood have to file a lawsuit?

There would need to be a lawsuit but if this ruling stands then it should be a quick and easy win in the district court, unless Hawaii plans to appeal to SCOTUS.

 

[press1280]

Let Ca take the DC approach. They keep regular mag sizes and let the 4th circuit suffer. Don't want the SCOTUS to make the decision.

No doubt they'll be pressured not to appeal. Keep in mind it could be a year from filing cert to actually being heard. One SCOTUS justice keeps going in and out of the hospital and could be replaced during that time. If she's replaced by Trump, I think the state may drop the appeal....

 

[Kharn]

It's 11 judges (Chief judge + 10 randomly chosen CA9 judges). There is a mechanism where ALL 29 judges can hear a case but I don't believe that's ever happened, but I don't put it past them to try and call for this if en banc is granted and the state loses yet again.

Just like how Henderson gets herself onto every DC panel involving guns, mysteriously, this en banc will just happen to randomly be drawn to be the D chief judge and every single D judge in the 9th plus the most left R judges they can find.

 

[press1280]

Just like how Henderson gets herself onto every DC panel involving guns, mysteriously, this en banc will just happen to randomly be drawn to be the D chief judge and every single D judge in the 9th plus the most left R judges they can find.

Curious how they actually do this. Do they pick names from a hat or is it computer generated or something?
From the % of GOP to Dem nominees we should get Chief Judge (Dem) + 4-5 GOP + 5-6 Dems as the most probable panel.

 

[Soda]

Don’t get all excited yet. They’re just going to do the usual en banc review shenanigans.

 

[2ndMDRebel]

Please correct me if I read this wrong but as I understand it the decision to strike it down was that it was too broad and basically restricted all firearms that a citizen could use to defend themselves. Now, if this stands somehow what is to keep the CA lawmakers from passing legislation banning >10rnd capacity for specifically named rifles and pistols, not just all? That seems like it would pass muster as it still leaves citizens options in self defense even though it doesn't technically fit the definition of "Shall not be infringed."

 

[teratos]

Please correct me if I read this wrong but as I understand it the decision to strike it down was that it was too broad and basically restricted all firearms that a citizen could use to defend themselves. Now, if this stands somehow what is to keep the CA lawmakers from passing legislation banning >10rnd capacity for specifically named rifles and pistols, not just all? That seems like it would pass muster as it still leaves citizens options in self defense even though it doesn't technically fit the definition of "Shall not be infringed."

It went into the Heller "common use" test. If something is in common use by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, it cannot be banned.

 

[Maestro Pistolero]

Sounds like it won on a straight ‘common use’ basis. I would definitely expect a call for en banc. But it is a a clear, strong opinion based on commonality, therefore unconstitutionality. It wouldn’t be the first to be overturned with tortured reasoning.

 

[Steel Hunter]

Please correct me if I read this wrong but as I understand it the decision to strike it down was that it was too broad and basically restricted all firearms that a citizen could use to defend themselves. Now, if this stands somehow what is to keep the CA lawmakers from passing legislation banning >10rnd capacity for specifically named rifles and pistols, not just all? That seems like it would pass muster as it still leaves citizens options in self defense even though it doesn't technically fit the definition of "Shall not be infringed."

Nothing stops CA lawmakers from passing asinine laws. Lawsuits are used to (ever so slightly) lessen the ridiculousness.

 

[bigmancrisler]

Or maybe we can see this in a more positive light and that being this is the first step in the right direction for the rest of the country as a whole.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Steel Hunter]

Or maybe we can see this in a more positive light and that being this is the first step in the right direction for the rest of the country as a whole.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Make no mistake, this is absolutely a very positive win.

This will have impact.

 

[bigmancrisler]

Make no mistake, this is absolutely a very positive win.

This will have impact.

Hopefully MSI can take their lawsuit even further and get the ban on binary triggers and the like repealed as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bigmancrisler]

Make no mistake, this is absolutely a very positive win.

This will have impact.

Keep rolling on the momentum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[grimnar15]

LOL

 

[GTOGUNNER]

LOL

That's great!

 

[bigmancrisler]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rockstarr]

LOL

You win the internet yesterday and today

 

[TinCuda]

.
https://gunmagwarehouse.com/blog/ca...428721264&mc_cid=b27b0af387&mc_eid=5d4d013c5a
.
.,

 

[whistlersmother]

Ah, thanks for posting that, TinCuda.

I wondered why Joebob's had posted that they would not standard cap maga to commiefornia.

 

[babalou]

And this is what pisses me off. If it was reversed you know damn well it would go into affect, not stayed for one millisecond