Duncan V Bonta - large cap mags: OLD THREAD

[Ash359]

My son manages a gun shop in Washington. Sales there have been through the roof. I hope the decision affects every state covered by the 9th circuit.

The Benitez decision only effects California, but the 9th appeal could liberate Washington

[RickD427]

The Benitez decision only effects California, but the 9th appeal could liberate Washington

An appellate decision by the Ninth Circuit in the Duncan case would not "Liberate" Washington.

Washington state's large-capacity magazine ban would remain in place. There would need to be a separate challenge made to Washington's ban in order to overturn it. Such a challenge would be greatly facilitated by a favorable, and published, decision in the Duncan case, but it isn't automatic.

In the alternative, a favorable appellate decision in the Duncan case could also persuade the Washington legislature to repeal the Washington ban, but I'll let everyone draw their own opinion as to how likely that will be.

[cyphr02]

Interesting, there is a theory that St. Benitez is waiting for Washington's new AW ban to pass.

https://youtu.be/7LYpvIjJwzQ

This makes no sense. The Benitez cases are applicable to specific CA laws, that doesn't directly impact WA at all. WA residents will have to sue their own state for freedom.
Also, even if it did impact WA, which it doesn't, 1 second before - 1 year before wouldn't make a difference.
It took the judge 6 weeks to write up his ruling on the previous 1 case, he now has 4 in front of him and needs to make them all water tight individually and collectively (billy club case isn't going to help with that at all). Naturally it's going to take longer to craft 4 masterpieces than it took to conclude with 1.
The only reason to delay once already written is if there is a particularly disfavorable appellate panel.

[WithinReason]

Is it possible that Judge Benitez will submit his ruling when he believes he has finished, irrespective of other courts?

[homelessdude]

^^^^WINNER^^^^^^

[Sputnik]

Is it possible that Judge Benitez is will submit his ruling when he believes he has finished irrespective of other courts?

Exactly. He has a lot on his plate and all the decisions need to be done right so they hold up under appeal, if not a the 9th, at scotus.
When they?re done he?ll release them. I doubt the case(s) in other states have any bearing on his timeline.

[Luciansulla]

I mean, he’s writing four opinions concurrently. It’s a lot of work!

[bwiese]

I mean, he?s writing four opinions concurrently. It?s a lot of work!

He will, but he has assistance (assitants).

[Drivedabizness]

He will, but he has assistance (assitants).

PLUS, he's already done a lot of the work. NOTHING SCOTUS has done has affected ANY of his prior findings of both fact and law. Bruen has teed up a nice opportunity - and the State has offered NOTHING that will satisfy Text and History.

[rational_behavior]

How can the delay tactics of the defendants be mitigated?

What I mean is, if Benitez issues a ruling that affirms the legality of magazines, then when the defendants inevitably appeal his judgement to the 3-judge panel, and the 3-judge panel stays Benitez' decision, can the plaintiffs immediately appeal the stay to the 9th en banc with a view to shortening the duration of what we all know is going to happen?

Is there something about this case that would cause a speedier resolution than others in light of the fact that this has already been up and down the flagpole already?

[Drivedabizness]

I believe any appeal would be to SCOTUS. The 9th decides if they dislike the panel decision enough to overturn it en banc - which they have done with amazing regularity on 2A cases.

[Chewy65]

How can the delay tactics of the defendants be mitigated?

What I mean is, if Benitez issues a ruling that affirms the legality of magazines, then when the defendants inevitably appeal his judgement to the 3-judge panel, and the 3-judge panel stays Benitez' decision, can the plaintiffs immediately appeal the stay to the 9th en banc with a view to shortening the duration of what we all know is going to happen?

Is there something about this case that would cause a speedier resolution than others in light of the fact that this has already been up and down the flagpole already?

Actually, if Benitez issues a judgment, its appeal doesn't stay but vacates the judgment pending appeal. Same difference. If the appeal is granted then Plainatiffs can petition for a writ of Certiorari. It may be preferrable to lose at the 9th, becasue if we win, everything will be delayed by en-banc foolishmess. I would rather see this in front of SCOTUS and pronto.

[TruOil]

Actually, if Benitez issues a judgment, its appeal doesn't stay but vacates the judgment pending appeal. Same difference. If the appeal is granted then Plainatiffs can petition for a writ of Certiorari. It may be preferrable to lose at the 9th, becasue if we win, everything will be delayed by en-banc foolishmess. I would rather see this in front of SCOTUS and pronto.

Umm, no. The reason that courts of appeals issue stays is because the trial court judgment is not vacated by the appeal, but remains in force and effect until stayed and unless ultimately overturned by the appellate decision.

[rational_behavior]

I believe any appeal would be to SCOTUS. The 9th decides if they dislike the panel decision enough to overturn it en banc - which they have done with amazing regularity on 2A cases.

I see. So the "en banc review" is not necessarily instigated by a litigant, but is like "Internal Affairs" for the 9th circuit? (Although, it goes without saying that ban-happy politicians and judges go to the same cocktail parties and such -- "its a big club, and you ain't in it")...do I understand correctly?

I am reminded here of the supreme court recently turning down an emergency appeal from the plaintiffs in one of the cases about the post-Bruen New York State CCW law. The implication being, it is not something the SC wants to do all else being equal.

On the other hand, this case and others like it have already been GVRed by the SC, so its not similar to the Antonyuk v Hochul case.

[tast101]

I believe any appeal would be to SCOTUS. The 9th decides if they dislike the panel decision enough to overturn it en banc - which they have done with amazing regularity on 2A cases.

My understanding is I goes the normal process.

Benetiz, then if appealed 3 judge panel, then if appealed 11 judge panel, then if appealed SCOTUS. I thought you couldn?t skip the steps, because otherwise after the first appeal We could just skip to SCOTUS and say look they aren?t following the guidelines set forth by you, spank their hand and give us a ruling.

This is also why people are saying it?ll be years before this is over. Because of the delay process the state is doing know that each level has to be hit. But also by doing that, if the ninth has to rule then that means it?s not just Cali affect, and if it goes to SCOTUS the Nation can kiss any BAN goodbye and they can all gang up on Bonta and Newsome for fighting back too much.