Duncan V Bonta - large cap mags: OLD THREAD

[homelessdude]

The 10 th will provide the answer.

[AlmostHeaven]

I hope they go full retard by doubling down on their belligerent resistance to the 2A and Bruen/Heller case law. This will make for an epic SCOTUS ruling that will likely include some tough language about hardware bans NOT being in accordance with THT.

I feel a point needs to be made about hardware bans or we will just get another stupid round of laws enacted. It's an endless game of absurdity and harassment by a few liberal states. This sh1t needs to stop.

Knock on wood, cross your fingers, and pray to God that five or six Supreme Court Justices have the constitutional fortitude to deliver a solid rebuke in the form of an ironclad Second Amendment majority opinion that seals the remaining holes in NYSRPA v. Bruen.

[bool1tholz]

I hope they go full retard by doubling down on their belligerent resistance to the 2A and Bruen/Heller case law. This will make for an epic SCOTUS ruling that will likely include some tough language about hardware bans NOT being in accordance with THT.

I feel a point needs to be made about hardware bans or we will just get another stupid round of laws enacted. It's an endless game of absurdity and harassment by a few liberal states. This sh1t needs to stop.

The Overton window has moved the country into full banana republic mode:
FBI looks like secret police force sometimes,
State legislatures ignore the constitution,
State courts blue states New York, etc are kangaroo courts attacking political enemies
Media has become state mouthpiece spreading propaganda

In this environment why wouldn't the ninth circuit also go full retard?

Even if they get smacked by scotus maybe that's what they think they want so they can claim this shows scotus is the problem and they can try to move forward with the idea of scotus court packing adding more Supreme Court justices.

[Sgt Raven]

For real! I am running out of room for all my tabs - I now have Miller, Duncan, now the second Duncan, Rhode, Renna, and Boland threads all open for months. Looking forward to any of these cases finally finishing and I can close a tab, haha

I have one window with 20+ tabs for all the CalGuns 2A threads I'm following. That way I go to the spot I left at.


I have other windows/tabs for different subjects and sites.

[zeneffect]

Why does it matter. They could win with the Chewbacca defense. Literally.

What is the Chewbacca defense?

[Librarian]

So, I seem to have lost a thread here

Getting old, I'm sure.

I hope someone can lay this out for me.

Back in the depths of time, Duncan v Bonta had a ruling that 32310 was unconstitutional, and Judge Benitez stayed the ruling after some time would elapse. That gave us 'freedom week'.

And the 9th 3-judge panel said yep, that's right, and the enjoinment of enforcement continued.

And the en banc panel said, nope, that's wrong.

So, what happened to the (old) injunction between the filing for cert and now?

The Sep 22 ruling is already stayed, and the State is asking for more stay rulings.

[Librarian]

What is the Chewbacca defense?

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ChewbaccaDefense

A Chewbacca Defense is a way of "winning" a debate through methods other than logic and reasoned argument. The essence of it is that if you get your opponent to give up, then you "win". Even if you just spout patent nonsense ? in fact, especially if you spout patent nonsense, because there's just no way to argue against it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElZfE1AVDPQ

[curtisfong]

https://storage.courtlistener.com/re...345123.9.0.pdf

State just filed a bunch of horse-s***.

The 9th will copy/paste this nearly verbatim into their holding. They know it is what is expected of them.

[Fyathyrio]

Chewbaca defense is a totally different animal, and more accurate in this case, I believe.

[zeneffect]

Chewbaca defense is a totally different animal, and more accurate in this case, I believe.

Hmmm first I had seen this. Seems a more compelling argument than what the state submitted.

[curtisfong]

Hmmm first I had seen this. Seems a more compelling argument than what the state submitted.

Imagine a world where a judge literally copy/pastes the Chewbacca defense into a holding for political reasons. That is Sidney Thomas' legacy. Not Judge. Just "Sidney" because that is all this scumbag is.

[BB1776]

I expect the next steps from the 9th's fascist faction is to try and push THT to post civil war era instead of the time when the Constitution was adopted. That's probably how they'll try and twist NYSRPA vs Bruen towards the direction they wish to go.

This is possible and a potential weakness of Bruen (though I understand why the court included it given the 14th). Off the cuff, however, state evidence would probably only point to more racist laws trying g to keep black people from defending themselves.

On another note, I?m going to leave this link to the recently posted CRPA video about the Duncan case here as too few people have viewed and it is BEAUTIFUL:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-ueuM18FB68

[Sputnik]

This is possible and a potential weakness of Bruen (though I understand why the court included it given the 14th). Off the cuff, however, state evidence would probably only point to more racist laws trying g to keep black people from defending themselves.

On another note, I?m going to leave this link to the recently posted CRPA video about the Duncan case here as too few people have viewed and it is BEAUTIFUL:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-ueuM18FB68

Agreed. Definitely worth a watch. Mr. Michel gave some good insights.

[AlmostHeaven]

Two to six months is much shorter of an estimate than I anticipated!

[tenemae]

So, what happened to the (old) injunction between the filing for cert and now?

I sorted through all the court actions on Michellawyers.com to get the dates and actions straight in my own head. Below are what I believe to be the most important and relevant ones.

• District 6/29/2017 Order Granting Preliminary Injunction
  Benitez enjoins Becerra from enforcing 32310(c) + (d), preventing the required dispossesion of LCMs which otherwise would have gone into effect July 1, 2017
• 9CA/D 7/28/2017 Order of USCA as to Notice of Appeal to 9th Circuit
  Becerra petitions 9ca to appeal PI
• 9CA 7/17/2018 Memorandum Affirming
  3-judge panel affirms the injunction against 32310(c) + (d). Batts and Smith concur, Wallace dissents
• 9CA 8/22/2018 Order Calling a Vote for Rehearing En Banc
• District 3/29/2019 Judgment
  Benitez grants summery judgement
  "California Penal Code ? 32310 is hereby declared to be unconstitutional in its entirety and shall be enjoined"
  ** start of freedom week **
• District 4/1/2019 Defendant?s Ex Parte Application to Stay Judgment Pending Appeal
• District 4/4/2019 Defendant?s Notice of Appeal
  ** End of freedom week **
• District 4/4/2019 Order Staying in Part Judgment Pending Appeal
  The permanent injunction enjoining enforcement of California Penal Code ? 32310 (a) and (b) is hereby stayed, effective 5:00 p.m., Friday, April 5, 2019.
  the preliminary injunction issued on June 29, 2017, enjoining enforcement of California Penal Code ? 32310 (c) and (d) shall remain in effect.
  the permanent injunction enjoining enforcement of California Penal Code ? 32310 (a) and (b) shall remain in effect for those persons and business entities who have manufactured, imported, sold, or bought magazines able to hold more than 10 rounds between the entry of this Court?s injunction on March 29, 2019 and 5:00 p.m., Friday, April 5, 2019
• 9CA 8/14/2020 Opinion
  Order by Judges Lee and Callahan affirming the District Court's grant of summary judgement, with Lynn dissenting
• 9CA 8/28/2020 Petition for Rehearing En Banc
• 9CA 11/30/2021 Opinion
  "The en banc court reversed the district court?s summary judgment and remanded for entry of judgment in favor of Defendant Rob Bonta"
• 9CA 12/14/2021 Appellees? Motion to Stay Mandate
  Requests the court to enter a partial stay of the mandate pending writ of cert
• 9CA 12/20/2021 Order Granting Motion to Stay Mandate
  The mandate is stayed until final disposition by the Supreme Court
• SCOTUS 6/30/2022 Petition GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED
• 9CA 9/23/2022 Order Vacating and Remanding
• District 9/26/2022 Order Spreading the Mandate and Continuing the Preliminary Injunction
  The previously entered preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of California Penal Code ? 32310 (c) and (d) for magazines able to hold more than ten rounds shall remain in effect for all those who previously acquired and possessed magazines legally (including those persons and business entities who acquired magazines between March 29, 2019 and April 5, 2019), pending further Order of this Court

Upon filing for cert, the injunction was preserved until SCOTUS was done with the case. Once it vacated and remanded... I don't know. I'm not really sure what happened to the injunction between 06/30/2022 and 09/26/2022. Perhaps a lawyer could chime in. But from the wording in the 9/26/2022 order "shall remain in effect", I interpret that as the injunction never lapsed