Tea Leaf Reading on St. Benitez Timing????

[Drivedabizness]

Judge Benitez knows the facts and issues, probably better than any other District Court Judge (at least in the 9CA).

Judge Carmac and Sabraw (sorry if I misspelled their names) have both made pretty quick work of their respective cases.

I've heard people say that Benitez really has to be thorough in his rulings. OK - is there anything else in play?

I'm jonesing to read his next batch of decisions.

[G-forceJunkie]

Duh, two weeks!

[WithinReason]

This is spitballing, but I see him as a traditionalist. My theory is that he is waiting until after Easter.

[Drivedabizness]

Originally Posted by WithinReason

This is spitballing, but I see him as a traditionalist. My theory is that he is waiting until after Easter.

I was hoping for Good Friday

[cxr]

Time traveler from the future told me.
Exactly 14. Days. Lol.

[Bhobbs]

His first Miller ruling took 6 weeks. We are about 6 weeks out from the last responses, so it could be any day now. There’s no way to know for sure.

[taperxz]

He may wait till he thinks he has a favorable appeals court

[1911su16b870]

Originally Posted by Drivedabizness

I was hoping for Good Friday

Me too! Good Friday at 1659! Freedom resurrection weekend so all those ARs/AKs can be made normal again

[jcwatchdog]

Originally Posted by taperxz

He may wait till he thinks he has a favorable appeals court

Yeah, apparently the last one sucked *** (see Boland).

[ritter]

Originally Posted by taperxz

He may wait till he thinks he has a favorable appeals court

Makes sense. Any idea how to find out who would hear it in April?

[1911su16b870]

Originally Posted by taperxz

He may wait till he thinks he has a favorable appeals court

So how is the appeals court judge appointees within Justice Benitez's influence?

My understanding is it is what it is right now, and because this is a constitutional issue, speed and rationale are of utmost importance.

[vino68]

[jcwatchdog]

Originally Posted by 1911su16b870

So how is the appeals court judge appointees within Justice Benitez's influence?

My understanding is it is what it is right now, and because this is a constitutional issue, speed and rationale are of utmost importance.

Because if he decides not to issue the stay on his own rulings, he would want to wait for a group that would back him up. Instead of the clown show we got with Sidney Thomas and the last panel that stayed Boland.

[jcwatchdog]

Originally Posted by ritter

Makes sense. Any idea how to find out who would hear it in April?

I think they used to provide that information, but in the interest of transparency within the 9th circuit since they?re so upstanding, they decided to keep the panels a secret.

[curtisfong]

Originally Posted by jcwatchdog

Because if he decides not to issue the stay on his own rulings, he would want to wait for a group that would back him up. Instead of the clown show we got with Sidney Thomas and the last panel that stayed Boland.

Sidney really is trash. He does not deserve any respect.

[gunuser17]

By 9th Circuit rule: Disclosure of Judges on Panels. The names of the judges on each panel are released to the general public on the Monday of the week preceding argument. At that time, the calendar of cases scheduled for hearing posted on the Court’s website is updated to include the names of the judges. This permits the parties to prepare for oral argument before particular judges. Once the calendar is made public, motions for continuances will rarely be granted.

A common way for judge disclosure in federal appellate courts I believe.

[1911su16b870]

Thanks...we don't yet know the panel on the appeal court per this link (CRPA discussing Renna and Boland):

https://youtu.be/x1kgwRe2rlw?t=472

[michaelh1951]

The Washington Gun Law channel on You-tube just published a theory on this....They predict Washington's new restrictions will be passed April 20, anniversary of Columbine, and that they will have a huge photo-op signing party that very day.

They speculated that Benitez is waiting for the bill to pass, and that he will rule before Washington's governor can sign, thus handing him a steaming pile to deal with.

HAHAHAHA if so!!!

[tenemae]

Originally Posted by michaelh1951

They speculated that Benitez is waiting for the bill to pass, and that he will rule before Washington's governor can sign, thus handing him a steaming pile to deal with.

How does a California District Court have any bearing on what Washington State can do?

[trackhazard]

[Sgt Raven]

Originally Posted by tenemae

How does a California District Court have any bearing on what Washington State can do?

California and Washington are both in the 9th Circuit. Judge Benitez's ruling can be Persuasive in other 9th Circuit District Courts. New laws could be stayed pending the outcome of Miller v Bonta in the 9th Circuit Court, too.

[ojisan]

9th Circuit area of jurisdiction.

[tenemae]

Originally Posted by Sgt Raven

California and Washington are both in the 9th Circuit. Judge Benitez's ruling can be Persuasive in other 9th Circuit District Courts. New laws could be stayed pending the outcome of Miller v Bonta in the 9th Circuit Court, too.

Right. But that process takes a LOT of time and any rulings will be stayed pending appeal to the 9th, en banc if need be. And if you've been paying attention, the full 9th has never ruled favorably to 2A. So even if Benitez drops a ruling overturning the AWB in CA, that means nothing to Washington until the 9th steps in and upholds his ruling instead of overturning it.

Or am I wrong and a California district court actually does have jurisdiction in Washington?

[BAJ475]

Originally Posted by tenemae

Right. But that process takes a LOT of time and any rulings will be stayed pending appeal to the 9th, en banc if need be. And if you've been paying attention, the full 9th has never ruled favorably to 2A. So even if Benitez drops a ruling overturning the AWB in CA, that means nothing to Washington until the 9th steps in and upholds his ruling instead of overturning it.

Or am I wrong and a California district court actually does have jurisdiction in Washington?

You are not wrong but a well-written opinion by Judge Benitez is just another arrow in the quiver of those who will be filing lawsuits to enjoin Washington's new anti 2A gun laws.

[CurlyDave]

Originally Posted by michaelh1951

The Washington Gun Law channel on You-tube just published a theory on this....They predict Washington's new restrictions will be passed April 20, anniversary of Columbine, and that they will have a huge photo-op signing party that very day.

They speculated that Benitez is waiting for the bill to pass, and that he will rule before Washington's governor can sign, thus handing him a steaming pile to deal with.

HAHAHAHA if so!!!

As much as I want to believe the Washington Gun Law channel, my brain is telling me it is nothing but click bait.

I think Benitez is going to deliver up all of his rulings at the same time and they will be very carefully crafted. He knows perfectly well that when SCOTUS told the 2CA plaintiffs the door was open to come back, their words were also directed to the 9CA.

He has a real chance to influence history and he is making his rulings every bit as good as he can.

A 9CA stay will be promptly appealed to SCOTUS, and hopefully NYSRPA will be enforced.

[ritter]

Most likely, he's waiting to determine who at CA9 is hearing appeals. If it ends up being favorable, he'll issue. If not, he'll wait a month(s) in hopes of a better CA9 panel.

[G-forceJunkie]

That doesnt matter at all, it would just go enbanc and we would loose. Stalling is just going to take more time till we get it the Supreme Court.

Originally Posted by ritter

Most likely, he's waiting to determine who at CA9 is hearing appeals. If it ends up being favorable, he'll issue. If not, he'll wait a month(s) in hopes of a better CA9 panel.

[Dvrjon]

This more complex than just one decision in one case. All of Benitez’ cases are intertwined. They all hinge on the new criteria of THT, and the logic of each has to mesh with the others. If an over-reach/under-reach or misconception/loophole appears in one, the others will be suspect.

They need the time to ensure that the individual cases stand on their own and also that the process and logic followed in each is internally valid for all.

[SpudmanWP]

Not to mention all of the crap that CA thew against the wall that Benitez has to research, with context.

[Sgt Raven]

Originally Posted by G-forceJunkie

That doesnt matter at all, it would just go enbanc and we would loose. Stalling is just going to take more time till we get it the Supreme Court.

It depends on which 9th Circuit Active Judges are randomly picked for the En Banc Panel. The only one we know will be on the Panel, is the Chief Judge.

[cz74]

Originally Posted by Sgt Raven

It depends on which 9th Circuit Active Judges are ```randomly``` picked for the En Banc Panel. The only one we know will be on the Panel, is the Chief Judge.

It is "rigged random" I would call it. Was it the Dungan case when En-Banc reversed the 3-judge panel decision? Trump put 10 judges to the 9th but only one or two picked to be En Banc in that case.

[Ocdlaw]

Can somebody do a welfare check on Judge Benitez?

[3.1Kfps]

That?s almost not funny considering how dirty leftest play?

[Sgt Raven]

Originally Posted by cz74

It is "rigged random" I would call it. Was it the Dungan case when En-Banc reversed the 3-judge panel decision? Trump put 10 judges to the 9th but only one or two picked to be En Banc in that case.

What proof do you have, that the En Banc Panel is not randomly picked?

[ritter]

Originally Posted by Sgt Raven

What proof do you have, that the En Banc Panel is not randomly picked?

Circumstantial, but every 2A case since Heller that has gone en banc (even with an original CA9 3-judge panel win) has been lost. We're at something like 0 for 50 since Heller.

[JWHuey]

Patriots day. ����

Would be a good day to strike against tyranny, Your Honor...

[michaelh1951]

Originally Posted by ritter

Circumstantial, but every 2A case since Heller that has gone en banc (even with an original CA9 3-judge panel win) has been lost. We're at something like 0 for 50 since Heller.

The SC has clearly stated that policy is not permitted. Hopefully if it happens again, they will slap down the offenders

[Drivedabizness]

Originally Posted by Sgt Raven

What proof do you have, that the En Banc Panel is not randomly picked?

Other than the fact that no en banc panel has ever had a majority of Republican appointed judges?

[JWHuey]

Originally Posted by Drivedabizness

Other than the fact that no en banc panel has ever had a majority of Republican appointed judges?

Sheer coincidence..

Surely. Right?

[bwiese]

Originally Posted by JWHuey

Sheer coincidence..

Surely. Right?

Yep. Blame CA Reeps for being unelectable in CA (pro-life, Prop 8, etc.)