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

[FreemanG]

What happens if Bonta did not file? Does that allow Benitez to rule immediately?

It would be at his discretion. Most likely if they missed the filing completely and its not just a case of the brief not being uploaded before end of day, they will file for an excusable neglect motion and get an extra few weeks to submit again at Benitez' discretion.

[rewireroy]

Damn, Bonta filed

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.casd.642089/gov.uscourts.casd.642089.137.0.pdf

They basically argue that since the features that are restricted dont restrict gun ownership, its not unconstitutional.

[FreemanG]

Damn, Bonta filed

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.casd.642089/gov.uscourts.casd.642089.137.0.pdf

They basically argue that since the features that are restricted dont restrict gun ownership, its not unconstitutional.

Its basically just a redressing of their argument from before. Nothing new really. More of that interest balancing bs

[jcwatchdog]

Its basically just a redressing of their argument from before. Nothing new really. More of that interest balancing bs

[1911su16b870]

The states argues:

Features are not arms.

AWs are not commonly used for self defense.

Both claims are false under NYPRA v Bruen.

They also state that AWs are military weapons - an error in fact.

[ritter]

Man, we sure are wasting a lot of time and money on "accessories" as the state is now calling "features." One wonders, are pen and paper accessories to speech. How about computers and the internet? Starting right off the bat that all this fuss is over "accessories" seems mighty weak, almost frivolous.

And on page 4, let the twisting begin.
Um, no. There is no "or" there. It is very definitively "and." Dangerous and unusual. With two letters, the state has just lied about the entirety of Heller.

Cants read no mo.

[Dvrjon]

State: “When we lose, it’s not our fault. The judge didn’t give us enough time”.

Accordingly, if the Court is not prepared to find that the AWCA is constitutional based on the existing record, Defendants object to the post-remand proceedings as failing to provide sufficient time to develop evidence, and they respectfully request three additional months to complete additional expert discovery, followed by further merits briefing.

[ritter]

Because research since 2019 just hasn't been enough time.

The only thing Bruen clarified in the Heller standard (which was affirmed, not overturned as the state is hinting at) was terminating the two-step (which was not in Heller) and limiting the timeframe of relevant history. Since the state has already pled English law supports a ban (through twisting the quote), it follows the state has already done an exhaustive historical dig and come up short. The state's twisting everything to their cause by word omissions or changing "and" to "or" is dishonest at best. Why even bother citing if you're twisting the citation to the opposite? Do they think the serfs can't read?

[dmcag69]

Browning hi point semiautomatic rifle?

Basically rob goes back to England and Scotland kings and peasants about restricted ownership
Banning repeating rifles from native Americans and Blacks of the time which was racist and unconstitutional, using that as a defense, reminds me of la city council last couple of daysa
Small towns ban in late 1800s of carrying firearms in southern towns in the south were done by KKK democrats after the civil war who were ex confederates butt hurt from losing the civil war to keep blacks from carrying

Any firearm laws from the south during the late 1800s were made by racist KKK democrats against blacks of the time, again unconstitutional

State of California and Rob used racist
And old England laws ( which is why we had revolutionary war in first place to create united states' and be free from England) to defend their argument

[CGZ]

They add the gunpowder storage laws of the era, which have analogs to laws still in effect today. There are limits on how much smokeless powder you can own and how it's to be stored. Even more so for black powder. These are more of a fire code law though. IIRC California's laws on this fall under the health and safety codes, not the penal codes. They then twist this to fit their narrative.

[ritter]

Does using unconstitutional law to support unconstitutional law make it constitutional?

[JiuJitsu]

CA really hung their hat on that "dangerous [or] unusual" omission. Purposely taking out that "and" and replacing it with "or" just so they could harp on the dangerous aspect for pages and pages of arguments.

Well that's not going to fly. Case law says it must be BOTH. And attempting to claim that the most popular rifles in America (with any of these features or not) are "unusual" is laughable.

[ritter]

CA really hung their hat on that "dangerous [or] unusual" omission. Purposely taking out that "and" and replacing it with "or" just so they could harp on the dangerous aspect for pages and pages of arguments.

Well that's not going to fly. Case law says it must be BOTH. And attempting to claim that the most popular rifles in America (with any of these features or not) are "unusual" is laughable.

Yeah. Coming out as nothing but liars and racists is not a great look. I'm pretty sure Benitez can read SCOTUS opinions and will note the substitution. I would, frankly, toss the brief in the trash over such a gross misrepresentation if it landed on my desk.

[homelessdude]

When does the reply have to be filed? It should be an interesting read.

[ritter]

When does the reply have to be filed? It should be an interesting read.

15 days, if memory serves.