Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > 2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion Discuss California 2A related litigation and legal topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-07-2017, 5:57 PM
Kestryll's Avatar
Kestryll Kestryll is offline
Head Janitor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Occupied Reseda, PRK
Posts: 20,723
iTrader: 22 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default Villianueva v. Becerra - AW Regs.

CRPA and NRA have just filed Villanueva v. Becerra, which challenges California's "Assault Weapon" regulations. To read more about the case click here. An in depth analysis of the case is coming soon. Thank you for your support!
__________________
NRA Patron Life Member / CRPA Life Member / SAF Life Member
Calguns.net an incorported entity - President.
The Calguns Shooting Sports Assoc. - Vice President.
The California Rifle & Pistol Assoc. - Director.
DONATE TO NRA-ILA, CGSSA, AND CRPAF NOW!
Opinions posted in this account are my own and unless specifically stated as such are not the approved position of Calguns.net, CGSSA or CGF.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-07-2017, 6:02 PM
sbrady@Michel&Associates's Avatar
sbrady@Michel&Associates sbrady@Michel&Associates is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 575
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

NRA's alert on the lawsuit filed today: https://www.nraila.org/articles/2017...on-regulations
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-07-2017, 6:03 PM
Maltese Falcon's Avatar
Maltese Falcon Maltese Falcon is offline
Ordo Militaris Templi
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Glendale, CA
Posts: 5,911
iTrader: 73 / 100%
Default

Yay, go get'em !!

Time for my monthly CRPA donation.

.
__________________
The deterioration of every government begins with the decay of the principles on which it was founded. Charles-Louis de Secondat (1689-1755) Baron de Montesquieu


In America, freedom and justice have always come from the ballot box, the jury box, and when that fails, the cartridge box.
Steve Symms, ex-U.S. Senator, Idaho

Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-07-2017, 6:07 PM
meno377's Avatar
meno377 meno377 is offline
小さな女性
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: (34.2283 N, 118.5358 W), (33.6700 N, 117.7800 W)
Posts: 3,911
iTrader: 60 / 100%
Default

Great!!!
__________________
In honor of Fjold:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fjold View Post
I've been married so long that I don't even look both ways when I cross the street.
Quote:
A society that aims for equality before liberty, will end with neither equality nor liberty.
-Milton Friedman


Quote:
Its always seemed to me absurd that you make 100% of the people to do something, in order to make sure that 1 or 2% of the people dont behave badly.
-Milton Friedman
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-07-2017, 6:14 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,242
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

You guys rock!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-07-2017, 6:16 PM
Dump1567's Avatar
Dump1567 Dump1567 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,366
iTrader: 59 / 100%
Default

Awesome.

Is there any kind of injunction to get registration put on hold until this mess gets sorted out?
__________________
Watch & Pray
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-07-2017, 7:00 PM
Hooligan Hooligan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 271
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

The cost of defense should come from the personal account of the bill sponsor. That should stop a lot of these senseless laws.
__________________
On the firing line- depending on the day, determines which side of the line I'm supposed to stand on!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-07-2017, 7:07 PM
Divehobo's Avatar
Divehobo Divehobo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Massachusetts West
Posts: 622
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

donation made
__________________
President of Front Sight
NRA Endowment member

PM me for your FrontSight needs.

WTB: Sig 220 Legion
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-07-2017, 7:20 PM
SWalt SWalt is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Riverside
Posts: 5,984
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Fantastic! It seems CA took a page out of the older East Coast/Mid West Cities and States playbook and came up with regulations, hoops and hurdles that are confusing in order to make it extremely hard to register for the common person. I hope the Judge sees the games DOJ is playing and throws the law right out!
__________________
^^^The above is just an opinion.

NRA Patron Member
CRPA 5 yr Member

"...which from their verbosity, their endless tautologies, their involutions of case within case, and parenthesis within parenthesis, and their multiplied efforts at certainty by saids and aforesaids, by ors and by ands, to make them more plain, do really render them more perplexed and incomprehensible, not only to common readers, but to lawyers themselves. " - Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-07-2017, 7:24 PM
sbrady@Michel&Associates's Avatar
sbrady@Michel&Associates sbrady@Michel&Associates is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 575
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dump1567 View Post
Awesome.

Is there any kind of injunction to get registration put on hold until this mess gets sorted out?
Sign up for alerts from NRA and CRPA and you will find out in the near future.

And thanks to everyone for the kind words and support.

And, if anyone has any thoughts about the lawsuit, you are free to email them to me.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-07-2017, 7:30 PM
naeco81 naeco81 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Atherton, CA
Posts: 1,836
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Thanks for standing up for our rights.
Good time for any who aren't already members to join CRPA.
Pretty please, just do it like Nike.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch View Post
The architects of the assault weapon bans ... are simply trying to fight the Culture War. And we can't win, not in California anyway because you guys, the ones with the most to lose, refuse to do what you need to do to win the Culture Wars, which is to make Calguns and the gun rights community a truly big tent and stop driving people away simply because they are different from you.
Crime rate per 100k people
General population: 3,817
Police officers: 108
Legal CCW: 18
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-07-2017, 8:07 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,242
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbrady@Michel&Associates View Post
Sign up for alerts from NRA and CRPA and you will find out in the near future.

And thanks to everyone for the kind words and support.

And, if anyone has any thoughts about the lawsuit, you are free to email them to me.
I spotted a couple typos, but it may be too late to correct them? Nothing major, just some missing words here and there but they didn't change the message. Also I spotted a regulation number that was incorrect. If it matters, I can email you what they were, but I doubt they are a big deal. Great work on this, it looks awesome and I would be shocked if it doesn't result in something positive for us!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-07-2017, 10:19 PM
C.G.'s Avatar
C.G. C.G. is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Central Coast
Posts: 6,945
iTrader: 19 / 100%
Default

Excellent! Keeping my fingers crossed for an injunction!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-07-2017, 10:35 PM
1911_sfca's Avatar
1911_sfca 1911_sfca is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,259
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Vis-a-vis IIA and IIB (Category I and Category II "AW"s):

"It is no longer possible to register.." Not strictly true; consider the exemption for a CA Peace Officer, with a letter from his/her CLEO, who can currently register an Section I or II AW.

Raises a question, is there a distinction between the "AW" that is registered thusly, and a "BB AW" as the regulations propose to invent, which creates a distinction on what can be done to the firearm after it is registered?

For instance, as a LEO I can register an AW today, and change out the mag release tomorrow. DOJ proposes that I couldn't do the same for an AW I register today under this reg period .. but they are both AWs.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-07-2017, 11:23 PM
arnoldd arnoldd is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Thumbs up +1

+1
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-07-2017, 11:29 PM
Frisco3Gun's Avatar
Frisco3Gun Frisco3Gun is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Yay Area
Posts: 589
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Awesome! If this gets the traction it should, I hope this brings down all AW laws, but I'm not holding my breath..
__________________
God may have made men, but Samuel Colt made them equal.

WTB: Colt Detective Special, AMT Hardballer, all-INOX Beretta 92FS, Tikka T3 Sporter, pre-64 Winchester Model 70, HK MP5-A5 22LR

Cashback options for your Brownells, Cabelas, eBay, Amazon purchases..
Ebates Referral - $10 for you and $10 for me.
Active Junky (AJ) Referral - $10 for you and $10 for me.
Swagbucks too!
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-07-2017, 11:43 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,242
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frisco3Gun View Post
Awesome! If this gets the traction it should, I hope this brings down all AW laws, but I'm not holding my breath..
The Rupp v. Becerra suit, filed a couple months ago, seeks that.

This one is more specific, it seeks to get the registration regulations tossed.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-08-2017, 12:07 AM
Ubermcoupe's Avatar
Ubermcoupe Ubermcoupe is offline
🇺🇸 Trust Me, I'm Gov't
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: This information has been redacted in accordance with Title 18 U.S. Code 798
Posts: 14,207
iTrader: 63 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

6+ the CRPA. I like it.
__________________
Hauoli Makahiki Hou


-------
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-08-2017, 5:03 AM
SSOUNN's Avatar
SSOUNN SSOUNN is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Stockton/Sac, Ca
Posts: 780
iTrader: 79 / 100%
Default

Can someone guide me so I can make a donation..
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-08-2017, 7:26 AM
sfpcservice's Avatar
sfpcservice sfpcservice is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Suisun City
Posts: 1,402
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSOUNN View Post
Can someone guide me so I can make a donation..
I'll PM you my account and routing number...
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-08-2017, 7:29 AM
Dump1567's Avatar
Dump1567 Dump1567 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,366
iTrader: 59 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSOUNN View Post
Can someone guide me so I can make a donation..
https://californiariflepistol.z2syst....jsp?pageId=1&
__________________
Watch & Pray
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-08-2017, 8:12 AM
champu's Avatar
champu champu is offline
NRA Member, CRPA Member,
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Redondo Beach
Posts: 495
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dump1567 View Post
Awesome.

Is there any kind of injunction to get registration put on hold until this mess gets sorted out?
Be careful what you wish for.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-08-2017, 8:26 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,242
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by champu View Post
Be careful what you wish for.
Yep.

"Ok registration is on hold while the case is sorted out" ... 2 years later ... "ok you can register now, oh wait whoopsie, the deadline lapsed, sorry everyone"

I think what we're really hoping for is that the court tells DOJ they need to re-do their regulations, and that they need to do it fast - no more screwing around.

Problem is, whatever the court tells DOJ to do, they will appeal... So I'm not really sure how that'll work.

I might submit registration for one or two of my rifles before the court acts on this case, just in case the result ends up biting us.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-08-2017, 8:31 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,242
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Maybe the judge can issue an injunction blocking the enforcement of the registration deadline? That would probably help, but I'm not sure if they can - I didn't see a request for such injunctive relief in the complaint, and it may not even be something we can ask for, I don't know.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-08-2017, 8:53 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 15,756
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
Yep.

"Ok registration is on hold while the case is sorted out" ... 2 years later ... "ok you can register now, oh wait whoopsie, the deadline lapsed, sorry everyone"

I think what we're really hoping for is that the court tells DOJ they need to re-do their regulations, and that they need to do it fast - no more screwing around.

Problem is, whatever the court tells DOJ to do, they will appeal... So I'm not really sure how that'll work.

I might submit registration for one or two of my rifles before the court acts on this case, just in case the result ends up biting us.
Sorry, not even close. This is about getting the court to invalidate the entire law AND show the hypocracy of the entire CA political agenda to go after gun owners and destroying the 2A.

Read the complaint. It shows a chronological history of confiscation through attrition.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-08-2017, 8:58 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,242
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
Sorry, not even close. This is about getting the court to invalidate the entire law AND show the hypocracy of the entire CA political agenda to go after gun owners and destroying the 2A.

Read the complaint. It shows a chronological history of confiscation through attrition.
I read the whole thing. I don't see a prayer for relief from the penal codes, I only see prayer for relief from the regulations. It shows the chronological history of the AWCA, for reference, but isn't exactly complaining about it, it's only complaining about DOJ's regulatory scheme. Maybe you're thinking of Rupp v. Becerra, which is the case that's more like what you are describing.

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 09-08-2017 at 9:04 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-08-2017, 9:04 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 15,756
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Oh, and don't miss this part:

Quote:
Multiple lawsuits challenging other aspects of the unconstitutional laws passed last year are also in the works and will be filed in the coming weeks. Rupp is the first of a number of NRA/CRPA sponsored lawsuits soon to be filed that will challenge the “gunmageddon” bills, as well as the new laws enacted by Proposition 63
This fight is just getting started.
From the Rupp thread.

Yes and my point derives from this quote.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-08-2017, 9:10 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,242
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
From the Rupp thread.

Yes and my point derives from this quote.
???

I'm not seeing how that quote changes the content of this lawsuit, help me out here...
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-08-2017, 9:42 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 15,756
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
???

I'm not seeing how that quote changes the content of this lawsuit, help me out here...
You talked about Rupp, i responded with "yes" and then i quoted the scheme mentioned above in the quote i provided with the general plan of Michel and associates.

Then entire plan and multiple lawsuits is to destroy the entire scheme.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-08-2017, 9:53 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,242
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
You talked about Rupp, i responded with "yes" and then i quoted the scheme mentioned above in the quote i provided with the general plan of Michel and associates.

Then entire plan and multiple lawsuits is to destroy the entire scheme.
Ok I see what you mean now, and agree. I was confused because I thought you meant Villianueva, by itself, seeks to overturn the AWCA.

I see Villianueva as being two things: Primarily, it seeks immediate relief from the 2017 registration scheme (while Rupp may not be able to provide any relief before the registration deadline), and secondarily it's a sort of "backup plan" in case Rupp isn't successful at killing the AWCA, to help mitigate the damage that the AWCA causes us.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 09-08-2017, 9:58 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 15,756
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
Ok I see what you mean now, and agree. I was confused because I thought you meant Villianueva, by itself, seeks to overturn the AWCA.

I see Villianueva as being two things: Primarily, it seeks immediate relief from the 2017 registration scheme (while Rupp may not be able to provide any relief before the registration deadline), and secondarily it's a sort of "backup plan" in case Rupp isn't successful at killing the AWCA, to help mitigate the damage that the AWCA causes us.
I don't really see it as a back up plan since they are basically taking them to court over something that appears to have been an illegal implementation of the rules allowed. Regardless, DOJ must be held accountable for their actions for this and other laws they need to draft regulations for.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 09-08-2017, 10:04 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,242
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
Regardless, DOJ must be held accountable for their actions for this and other laws they need to draft regulations for.
Good point
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 09-08-2017, 10:30 AM
mshill's Avatar
mshill mshill is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,072
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

So, lets assume we receive injunctive relief at the superior court in Fresno and that the registration process as currently implemented is not allowed to proceed.

Does the state appeal this to the CA State Supreme Court or is there a stop in between?

What happens if the whole thing goes past 7/1/2018 and then is resolved in favor of the state?

It seems that we would be unable to comply with the law (register prior to 7/1/2018) and as such it would be unenforceable.

I have to believe that there are smart people at the DOJ/BOF. They knew this was coming since the NRA/CRPA telegraphed it twice in January and May.
What is the DOJ/BOF endgame that would cause them to double down on these regulations that it seems even an incompetent lawyer could get an injunction from?

Is this some kind of pump fake to draw us off of the real target?

The whole thing just leaves me scratching my head.
__________________
Quote:
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 09-08-2017, 10:31 AM
naeco81 naeco81 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Atherton, CA
Posts: 1,836
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

If a court tosses the regs via injunction then the registration window will have to be extended again. If they tried to seal it off without an appropriate registration process in place they'd only be inviting another lawsuit IMO.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch View Post
The architects of the assault weapon bans ... are simply trying to fight the Culture War. And we can't win, not in California anyway because you guys, the ones with the most to lose, refuse to do what you need to do to win the Culture Wars, which is to make Calguns and the gun rights community a truly big tent and stop driving people away simply because they are different from you.
Crime rate per 100k people
General population: 3,817
Police officers: 108
Legal CCW: 18
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 09-08-2017, 10:56 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,242
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mshill View Post
So, lets assume we receive injunctive relief at the superior court in Fresno and that the registration process as currently implemented is not allowed to proceed.

Does the state appeal this to the CA State Supreme Court or is there a stop in between?
They would/will absolutely appeal the preliminary injunction if we get one (to the 9th circuit court of appeals), as they always do. That's what they're doing with the magazine injunction, too. Their modus operandi is to always appeal everything, every time, until appeals are exhausted. It's only taxpayer money, after all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mshill View Post
What happens if the whole thing goes past 7/1/2018 and then is resolved in favor of the state?
Hard to say - we may have to wait and see what the preliminary injunction says (assuming we get one), before we'll know. Seems to me that they'd have to extend the deadline again, but there's no guarantees that they even can - such an extension has to go through through the entire legislative process, which could either pass or fail. The Assembly or Senate or Governor could decide they don't want to extend it again, and we'd be stuck with the 7/1 deadline. Seems like that would be ripe for another lawsuit if that happens, but there's no telling how long that would take or what the result would be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mshill View Post
It seems that we would be unable to comply with the law (register prior to 7/1/2018) and as such it would be unenforceable.
Hopefully that's accurate, but I don't know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mshill View Post
I have to believe that there are smart people at the DOJ/BOF. They knew this was coming since the NRA/CRPA telegraphed it twice in January and May.
What is the DOJ/BOF endgame that would cause them to double down on these regulations that it seems even an incompetent lawyer could get an injunction from?
Their endgame is the hope that the 9th circuit will bend over and do whatever they ask them to do. Unfortunately, it's a pretty good gameplan that's been working well for them so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mshill View Post
Is this some kind of pump fake to draw us off of the real target?
Not sure what other target there could be - pretty much every anti-gun law on the books right now is being heavily attacked in court as we speak, I don't think we've missed anything

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 09-08-2017 at 10:59 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 09-08-2017, 12:15 PM
CSTactical's Avatar
CSTactical CSTactical is offline
Vendor/Retailer
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 3,495
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 09-08-2017, 12:39 PM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Butte County, California
Posts: 1,547
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
They would/will absolutely appeal the preliminary injunction if we get one (to the 9th circuit court of appeals), as they always do. That's what they're doing with the magazine injunction, too. Their modus operandi is to always appeal everything, every time, until appeals are exhausted. It's only taxpayer money, after all.



Hard to say - we may have to wait and see what the preliminary injunction says (assuming we get one), before we'll know. Seems to me that they'd have to extend the deadline again, but there's no guarantees that they even can - such an extension has to go through through the entire legislative process, which could either pass or fail. The Assembly or Senate or Governor could decide they don't want to extend it again, and we'd be stuck with the 7/1 deadline. Seems like that would be ripe for another lawsuit if that happens, but there's no telling how long that would take or what the result would be.



Hopefully that's accurate, but I don't know.



Their endgame is the hope that the 9th circuit will bend over and do whatever they ask them to do. Unfortunately, it's a pretty good gameplan that's been working well for them so far.



Not sure what other target there could be - pretty much every anti-gun law on the books right now is being heavily attacked in court as we speak, I don't think we've missed anything
This is an issue of state law. So, the 9th would not have jurisdiction to hear an appeal. It would either be the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Fresno or the State Supreme Court

Last edited by BAJ475; 09-08-2017 at 12:43 PM.. Reason: correct typo
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 09-08-2017, 12:43 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,242
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BAJ475 View Post
This is an issue of state law. So, the 9th would not have jurisdiction to hear an appeal. It would either be the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Fresno or the State Supreme Court
Not saying you're wrong, this is a genuine question I don't know the answer to: Why is the 9th hearing the magazine injunction appeal then? Isn't that also an issue of state law?
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 09-08-2017, 12:49 PM
jwkincal's Avatar
jwkincal jwkincal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,388
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
Not saying you're wrong, this is a genuine question I don't know the answer to: Why is the 9th hearing the magazine injunction appeal then? Isn't that also an issue of state law?
Duncan was filed in Federal Court (as an actual 2A challenge), this one was filed in State Court (as a challenge against the DOJ's violation of State laws on Administrative Law procedures)
__________________
Get the hell off the beach. Get up and get moving. Follow Me! --Aubrey Newman, Col, 24th INF; at the Battle of Leyte

Certainty of death... small chance of success... what are we waiting for? --Gimli, son of Gloin; on attacking the vast army of Mordor

Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!
I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
--Patrick Henry; Virginia, 1775
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 09-08-2017, 12:56 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,242
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwkincal View Post
Duncan was filed in Federal Court (as an actual 2A challenge), this one was filed in State Court (as a challenge against the DOJ's violation of State laws on Administrative Law procedures)
Ah I see, that makes sense, I had thought they were both filed in the same court. Thank you for clarifying
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:42 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.