Miller v. Bonta 9th Ckt "assault weapons": Held for Duncan result 1-26-24

[kuug]

They can file for an emergency writ of mandate on the basis that the denial to lift the stay perpetuates the irreparable harm currently being suffered by the people as a result of a rogue court refusing to obey the SCOTUS.

That request will go to Kagan who gets to say yea or nay on it.

It's customary for "big issues" to be brought up to the rest of the justices.

[BAJ475]

It's customary for "big issues" to be brought up to the rest of the justices.

The BIG ISSUE has already been decided by SCOTUS. Now it is time for the libs to follow their oath of office or be impeached.

[Bolt_Action]

The BIG ISSUE has already been decided by SCOTUS. Now it is time for the libs to follow their oath of office or be impeached.

[IVC]

It won't be any different... IF they can find another loophole like the "two step rational basis analysis." But if they do, it's back to Thomas for quick patching and telling them he means what he says.

[BAJ475]

Yes, that is true. But Thomas took away their favorite arguments. It will be interesting to see how they respond to Young and Miller.

[randomBytes]

It won't be any different... IF they can find another loophole like the "two step rational basis analysis." But if they do, it's back to Thomas for quick patching and telling them he means what he says.

"Quick" is a relative term of course, years? months? surely not weeks or days.
And what can SCOTUS actually do except what they should have done first time, take all those cases and rule on them - THAT's how you slap down a lower court.

[IVC]

"Quick" is a relative term of course, years? months? surely not weeks or days.
And what can SCOTUS actually do except what they should have done first time, take all those cases and rule on them - THAT's how you slap down a lower court.

No, SCOTUS addresses lower court's workaround - that's the real slap down.

It's infinitely more valuable to us that Thomas set a specific review standard when the plain text of the amendment protects a conduct, than what happens in NY with respect to carry. The lower court no longer has two-step analysis and they have to come up with a new SYSTEM, not just a new argument.

[IVC]

"Quick" is a relative term of course, years? months? surely not weeks or days.

The cases that were GVR-ed are still active, so if the lower court comes to the incorrect conclusion (again), the Supreme Court can be petitioned for certiorari (again) and it's almost certain they would take it (again) - "G" in "GVR" stands for "granted cert."

[lastinline]

They can file for an emergency writ of mandate on the basis that the denial to lift the stay perpetuates the irreparable harm currently being suffered by the people as a result of a rogue court refusing to obey the SCOTUS.

How likely is to actually happen, and when? Weeks, months, years, or decades?

[fudd]

How likely is to actually happen, and when? Weeks, months, years, or decades?

[randomBytes]

No, SCOTUS addresses lower court's workaround - that's the real slap down.

Sure, but you can do that while at the same time providing immediate relief to the plaintiffs who by now have been denied their rights for years.

It's infinitely more valuable to us that Thomas set a specific review standard when the plain text of the amendment protects a conduct, than what happens in NY with respect to carry.

Again 100% agree, but the handling of the GVR'd cases is orthogonal to that.

The lower court no longer has two-step analysis and they have to come up with a new SYSTEM, not just a new argument.

It remains to be seen wether CA9 and the rest will do the right thing, or just twiddle their thumbs and otherwise passively resist until there's a new balance on SCOTUS

[IVC]

It remains to be seen wether CA9 and the rest will do the right thing, or just twiddle their thumbs and otherwise passively resist until there's a new balance on SCOTUS

There are quite a few limits to how far a court would go. CA-9 is far from this monolithic institution. We got en banced because of the WINS with three-judge panels. There is even larger number of Trump-appointed judges now.

[randomBytes]

There are quite a few limits to how far a court would go. CA-9 is far from this monolithic institution. We got en banced because of the WINS with three-judge panels. There is even larger number of Trump-appointed judges now.

Very true - imagine how much better life would be had Trump gotten another term....

[rewireroy]

Very true - imagine how much better life would be had Trump gotten another term....

Life would have been MUCH better had we elected Rand Paul vs Trump.

It amazes me that a president would keep someone like Fauci employed and then complain about it. It amazes me more that people think it was out of Trumps hands that Fauci stayed in that job or that federal agencies forced masks, lockdowns and vaccinations. He was 100% in control of that, regardless of what he says during his propaganda speeches.

The massive one is why anyone pro-2A would be okay with a president that restricted gun laws via the ATF and then call him pro 2A. There are a myriad of people that ran for POTUS that that would have never done that and also not close oil pipelines or appoint leftist SCOTUS Justices.

Life wouldve been better with anyone to the right of Biden, but life can be a lot better than what we experienced under Trump.

[JDoe]