Defense Distributed v. Bonta

[GetMeCoffee]

Originally Posted by BAJ475

No. But the fact that a tool can be used to make a firearm or part of a firearm does not provide a basis for regulating or prohibiting its distribution and any such attempts based on possible use in manufacturing firearms is barred by the 2A.

Just to put a finer point on this: Isn't there a requirement that regulations must serve a legitimate government purpose? For instance, in land use, a city cannot have a commercial zone which bans clock shops just because the citizens do not like clocks. In other words, regulations cannot be arbitrary, or am I incorrect? In this vein, neither could the government ban a CNC machine because it makes clocks. There's no legitimate government purpose there.

Likewise, the gov't could not ban a CNC machine just because it makes guns. Naturally they can articulate that guns are dangerous and therefore there is a government purpose, but since arms are protected by the 2A, wouldn't the state be precluded from using "because... guns!" to satisfy the legitimate purpose requirement?

[Odd_Ball]

Originally Posted by abinsinia

Are computers protected for first amendment protected communications ? Also all things people do in the name of religion is protected unless you hurt other humans.

Yes, I think all tools used to make firearms are protected, it makes sense because if you can ban the tool you can ban the guns made with the tool. It's an arms ban.

Like with all things legal, maybe ... not sure if the Supreme Court has decided the issue, but the 9th Circuit held that code was speech in 1995 Bernstein case (which involved encryption software and the Government's attempt to use a national security argument to prevent its publication to the general public):

• https://clinics.law.harvard.edu/blog...protects-code/
• https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/0...ed-code-speech

Other would disagree, or have a more nuanced view:

• https://www.technologyreview.com/201...peech-mistake/

[abinsinia]

STIPULATION to Dismiss Case filed by Plaintiff Defense Distributed. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Reynolds, Michael) (Entered: 11/18/2022)

https://storage.courtlistener.com/re...61550.24.0.pdf

Judge sucks in this one.

[abinsinia]

ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION TO DISMISSAL OF ACTION by Judge George H. Wu. Having reviewed the Stipulation and good cause appearing, the Court hereby approves the parties Stipulation and ORDERS as follows: 1. Plaintiffs First Claim for Relief is dismissed with prejudice. 2. Plaintiffs Second Claim for Relief is dismissed without prejudice. RE: Stipulation to Dismiss Case 24 , (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (aco) (Entered: 11/21/2022)

Looks like this case is over now.