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
  #6761  
Old 01-29-2024, 2:01 PM
RickD427's Avatar
RickD427 RickD427 is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: King County
Posts: 9,098
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BAJ475 View Post
The plaintiffs should have told the 3 judge panel to issue what ever decision they choose, so that the other side could seek an "en banc" rehearing so that Miller and Duncan could be consolidated and heard at the same time; because we know that the matter will not be resolved until it gets to SCOTUS.
I think that Judge Miller worked it the other way, and to the same end. He telegraphed, about as strongly as he could, that Miller needed to be heard jointly with Duncan.

I strongly suspect that the en banc panel will rule against Ms. Duncan. In every other circuit, the simple fact that the court votes for an en banc rehearing infers that the panel decision will not stand unless enough of the "for" voting judges are persuaded to change their minds following the arguments. The Ninth is a little different because the composition of the eleven judge panel may not fully reflect the voting composition of the court.

If Ms. Duncan should lose at the rehearing, the case is gonna go to the Supreme Court. If she prevails, I'm no so sure that the state would pursue an appeal. I can see Mr. Bonta having his arm twisted by other Attorneys General to refrain so as not to upset the state of the law in other circuits.
__________________
If you build a man a fire, you'll keep him warm for the evening. If you set a man on fire, you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life.
Reply With Quote
  #6762  
Old 01-29-2024, 2:37 PM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Kootenai County Idaho (Hayden)
Posts: 4,609
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RickD427 View Post
I think that Judge Miller worked it the other way, and to the same end. He telegraphed, about as strongly as he could, that Miller needed to be heard jointly with Duncan.

I strongly suspect that the en banc panel will rule against Ms. Duncan. In every other circuit, the simple fact that the court votes for an en banc rehearing infers that the panel decision will not stand unless enough of the "for" voting judges are persuaded to change their minds following the arguments. The Ninth is a little different because the composition of the eleven judge panel may not fully reflect the voting composition of the court.

If Ms. Duncan should lose at the rehearing, the case is gonna go to the Supreme Court. If she prevails, I'm not so sure that the state would pursue an appeal. I can see Mr. Bonta having his arm twisted by other Attorneys General to refrain so as not to upset the state of the law in other circuits.
As usual, we agree. If Duncan prevails, it would pretty much tie the hands of the Miller panel and would help the other 2A cases pending in CA and the 9th Circuit. Thus, I will be shocked if Duncan prevails.
Reply With Quote
  #6763  
Old 01-29-2024, 4:00 PM
AlmostHeaven AlmostHeaven is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Virginia
Posts: 3,151
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Exclamation

The Ninth Circuit will deny the en banc rehearing request because this instance would benefit Second Amendment plaintiffs, as opposed to gun control proponents.

The Supreme Court remains the only institution with the power to unjam this mess, but Chief Justice John Roberts and at least one of the other Republican appointees lack the fortitude.
__________________
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The Second Amendment makes us citizens, not subjects. All other enumerated rights are meaningless without gun rights.
Reply With Quote
  #6764  
Old 01-29-2024, 4:00 PM
AlmostHeaven AlmostHeaven is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Virginia
Posts: 3,151
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by BAJ475 View Post
As usual, we agree. If Duncan prevails, it would pretty much tie the hands of the Miller panel and would help the other 2A cases pending in CA and the 9th Circuit. Thus, I will be shocked if Duncan prevails.
The Ninth Circuit en banc panel did not seize control of Duncan v. Bonta away from the 3-judge panel to decide in favor of the Second Amendment. In fact, I expect even more dishonest machinations such as further remands.
Reply With Quote
  #6765  
Old 01-29-2024, 4:31 PM
Bhobbs Bhobbs is online now
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Chino CA
Posts: 11,774
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Is there anyway for the plaintiffs to petition to merge Miller with Duncan?
Reply With Quote
  #6766  
Old 01-29-2024, 6:02 PM
SpudmanWP SpudmanWP is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,102
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlmostHeaven View Post
The Ninth Circuit will deny the en banc rehearing request because this instance would benefit Second Amendment plaintiffs, as opposed to gun control proponents.
AWB cases are headed to SCOTUS from the 2nd, 4th, 7th, 10th, etc. The 9th not taking it en banc will not have any effect on this.
Reply With Quote
  #6767  
Old 01-29-2024, 11:25 PM
ar15barrels's Avatar
ar15barrels ar15barrels is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Van Nuys
Posts: 56,378
iTrader: 119 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhobbs View Post
Is there anyway for the plaintiffs to petition to merge Miller with Duncan?
They can petition to have pink flamingos served for lunch.
It's about as likely to occur as combining the two cases.

The two cases are contesting completely different PC so it's extremely unlikely they would ever be combined.

Flamingos for lunch is more likely.
Reply With Quote
  #6768  
Old 01-30-2024, 9:35 AM
Mongo68 Mongo68 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 117
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
They can petition to have pink flamingos served for lunch.
It's about as likely to occur as combining the two cases.

The two cases are contesting completely different PC so it's extremely unlikely they would ever be combined.

Flamingos for lunch is more likely.
MMMM deep fried. Like my 2A rights...
Reply With Quote
  #6769  
Old 01-30-2024, 4:00 PM
AlmostHeaven AlmostHeaven is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: Virginia
Posts: 3,151
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpudmanWP View Post
AWB cases are headed to SCOTUS from the 2nd, 4th, 7th, 10th, etc. The 9th not taking it en banc will not have any effect on this.
I understand, but the Fourth and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals have both successfully carried out a strategy of delay that have guaranteed none of the assault weapons ban cases will gain the procedural posture necessary for Supreme Court review until mid-2025, or even late-2025.

I see no indication that the other left-wing circuits will choose a different path.
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 12:06 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, 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 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy