Rhode v. Becerra (Challenge to CA Ammo Sales) - ORAL ARGS at 9th 11-9-2020

[OlderThanDirt]

If I read between the lines and note that the case is supported by two out of state vendors, it looks the injunction would allow the resumption of direct mail order deliveries. If so, some of our brighter Congress critters might be concerned that the added weight of ammo deliveries could cause California to capsize.

[hoystory]

Can someone explain to me why, according to the Brady affadavit, the Cal DOJ is of the legal opinion that FFL03 & COE holders can no longer have ammo shipped to them from out of state.

It was my understanding that was a specific allowance written into the law. Did something change or did the DOJ just decide they don't like it and don't need to follow it anymore?

Sent from my SM-T720 using Tapatalk

[sbrady@Michel&Associates]

We asked DOJ's attorney whether DOJ recognizes that exemption and he said they do not.

[OlderThanDirt]

[tenemae]

We asked DOJ's attorney whether DOJ recognizes that exemption and he said they do not.

So CA DoJ refuses to comply with the CA penal code. Unbelieveable. We desperately need the federal government to step in and stop this insanity. Hopefully the DoJ's attitude will result in being treated more favorably by the judge (Benitez, if I recall correctly)

[wolfwood]

Hearing Date: August 19, 2019
Hearing Time: 10:30 a.m.
Courtroom: 5A
Judge: Hon. Roger T. Benitez


I am going to try and make it to this. The Duncan arguments were great. I hope this will be just as good.

[tehDiceman]

Hearing Date: August 19, 2019
Hearing Time: 10:30 a.m.
Courtroom: 5A
Judge: Hon. Roger T. Benitez


I am going to try and make it to this. The Duncan arguments were great. I hope this will be just as good.

Address for the courthouse in case anyone needs it.

221 West Broadway
San Diego, CA 92101

[hoystory]

For those who are interested, I just posted a summary of the CRPA argument with bullet points here for those of you who don't have time to read the entire document.

Also, because I occasionally want to use that journalism degree my parents paid so much for, I filed a California Public Records Act request with the state DOJ.



I will share any information I receive with the forum.

[Cortelli]

Can someone explain to me why, according to the Brady affadavit, the Cal DOJ is of the legal opinion that FFL03 & COE holders can no longer have ammo shipped to them from out of state.

It was my understanding that was a specific allowance written into the law. Did something change or did the DOJ just decide they don't like it and don't need to follow it anymore?

I spent a fruitless half-hour looking for the Brady Group's affidavit on this before realizing you were referring to Sean Brady of Michel & Assoc!

These are the sorts of positions / arguments that entertain me in an otherwise serious proceeding -- I am *sooo* looking forward to DOJ's explanation of why they've taken this position that flies in the face of California law! (Assuming it is surfaced in this litigation).

[wolfwood]

that sounds like the argument which was made in Silvester and that did not work out. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal...016-12-14.html

[BeAuMaN]

LOL if u think the courts will side with us on this.

I mean do you have anything beyond just general pessimism or not? I get being pessimistic about the case in general, but this specific exemption that's very clearly written, and with an intent that is pretty clear?

It's a gem from where I stand.

[hoystory]

I don't see that the Michel Lawyers website for Rhode v. Becerra has been updated with this filing, but Becerra says the new ammo check requirement had blocked more than 100 felons or other prohibited persons from buying ammo.

Sean Brady says that 10,000 other ammo purchases were denied...to borrow the old legal saw, the state of California is punishing 100 innocent gun owners to make sure they get 1 criminal.

[cg&p]

I don't see that the Michel Lawyers website for Rhode v. Becerra has been updated with this filing, but Becerra says the new ammo check requirement had blocked more than 100 felons or other prohibited persons from buying ammo.

Sean Brady says that 10,000 other ammo purchases were denied...to borrow the old legal saw, the state of California is punishing 100 innocent gun owners to make sure they get 1 criminal.

what was the old Lenninist saying? "Better to kill thousands of innocents than to let 1 guilty person free" (?)

[wolfwood]

state filed its opposition

https://www.scribd.com/document/420998796/Rhodes-Opp-to-PI

[Guninator]

So they are using the backround check data for pressing charges and search warrants? wow

Source? Are you referring to CA's opposition motion? They don't actually say they are doing that. They were giving examples of other jurisdictions' uses of ammo ordinances.