Jones v. Bonta - Age-Based Ban on Firearm Purchases

[abinsinia]

We won on appeals. The Hunting license requirement is unconstitutional. Do you want to make these people go through hunters Ed and pay $52 a year to buy a long gun? Take the partial win and then file another suit to get rid of the hunting license requirements?

It’s the court system. There is no instant gratification in court. FPC can now ask for PI all the way to SCOTUS.

I don't think they should be subject to any of it, but the en banc court did not send it back to a corrupt district court to remove the hunting license part.

Maybe you want the hunting license gone also, but that's not why this is happening.

[p7m8jg]

I see what you did there!
Oliver Platt as Paul Bunyan in "Tall Tale" 1995.

[taperxz]

I don't think they should be subject to any of it, but the en banc court did not send it back to a corrupt district court to remove the hunting license part.

Maybe you want the hunting license gone also, but that's not why this is happening.

Please show me where this was En Banc. This ruling was from the appeals panel.

[abinsinia]

Please show me where this was En Banc. This ruling was from the appeals panel.

That's how it works, the appeals court made a decision , and the only way to wipe that decision is en banc. They requested en banc to wipe the appeals court case to send it back to the district court.

[taperxz]

That's how it works, the appeals court made a decision , and the only way to wipe that decision is en banc. They requested en banc to wipe the appeals court case to send it back to the district court.

Nope, read the article.

[abinsinia]

Nope, read the article.

That article that's linked someplace, but your not sure where right ?

[taperxz]

Try scrolling up ?

[abinsinia]

Hmm, so panel rehearing en banc, I wonder what that could mean.

[taperxz]

Hmm, so panel rehearing en banc, I wonder what that could mean.

Instead of an En Banc, the 3 judge panel sent it back to district court. There was no En Banc hearing.

[abinsinia]

Instead of an En Banc, the 3 judge panel sent it back to district court. There was no En Banc hearing.

I don't think that can be known, they don't tell you who the en banc panel is unless there is hearing, and this had no hearing.

[taperxz]

I don't think that can be known, they don't tell you who the en banc panel is unless there is hearing, and this had no hearing.

They were not granted an En Banc hearing. The Appeals court sent the case back to district to get it right and consistent with NY v Bruen.

The only thing not consistent with the case is the requirement of needing a hunting license. We already won the case so people 18-20 could buy any long gun. What else is there to get fixed? HUNTING LICENSE REQUIRED

[abinsinia]

They were not granted an En Banc hearing. The Appeals court sent the case back to district to get it right and consistent with NY v Bruen.

The only thing not consistent with the case is the requirement of needing a hunting license. We already won the case so people 18-20 could buy any long gun. What else is there to get fixed? HUNTING LICENSE REQUIRED

The reason it was sent back to the district court is to re-enable the law for another year and cause delays in the removal of the law. The district court will sit on it for ages , like Rupp, and maybe sometimes in a few years they will hear about your HUNTING LICENSE REQUIRED

[taperxz]

The reason it was sent back to the district court is to re-enable the law for another year and cause delays in the removal of the law. The district court will sit on it for ages , like Rupp, and maybe sometimes in a few years they will hear about your HUNTING LICENSE REQUIRED

Or, they get it to district, fix it right and appeals are denied.

Or, they sit on it and a Writ of Mandamus is requested to act accordingly. We don’t really know yet. You can speculate but the SCOTUS is primed for telling obtuse courts to knock it off, they said what they said and they don’t want more 2A cases.

[abinsinia]

You think a recalcitrant district court will do as your like ? It's not going to happen. We've seen this movie many times before. We already know what will happen.

[taperxz]

You think a recalcitrant district court will do as your like ? It's not going to happen. We've seen this movie many times before. We already know what will happen.

You’re stuck pre NY v Bruen in the head.

How come you didn’t comment on a possible Writ of Mandamus? Do you know what that means?