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

[ar15barrels]

I’m guessing the scheduling isn’t a mistake.
Could he just issue a PI until he issues his ruling?

The state wants more time to fully develop their "history" to try to make their cases.
He could issue a PI on all of the cases and also give the state the months and months of time it wants to develop it's history while the public gets it's proper 2a protections returned.
Everybody is happy that way.
Then he can rule on the cases much later after the state has taken as much time as they want.
That technically keeps the cases out of the hands of the 9th because without a judgement to overturn, the 9th likely does not have any control over the case until it finishes in the lower court.

[SmallShark]

what PI are you talking about?

The state wants more time to fully develop their "history" to try to make their cases.
He could issue a PI on all of the cases and also give the state the months and months of time it wants to develop it's history while the public gets it's proper 2a protections returned.
Everybody is happy that way.
Then he can rule on the cases much later after the state has taken as much time as they want.
That technically keeps the cases out of the hands of the 9th because without a judgement to overturn, the 9th likely does not have any control over the case until it finishes in the lower court.

[Sgt Raven]

The state wants more time to fully develop their "history" to try to make their cases.
He could issue a PI on all of the cases and also give the state the months and months of time it wants to develop it's history while the public gets it's proper 2a protections returned.
Everybody is happy that way.
Then he can rule on the cases much later after the state has taken as much time as they want.
That technically keeps the cases out of the hands of the 9th because without a judgement to overturn, the 9th likely does not have any control over the case until it finishes in the lower court.

That hasn't stopped the State or BATFE from running to the Appeals Court about the PI issued in other cases. I'm thinking about ongoing cases in NY & Texas.

[rice_man]

bring a Pmag and ask Judge Benitez to sign it

That would be beautiful!

Aw c'mon. I would love to have him sign one of these.

[GetMeCoffee]

The state wants more time to fully develop their "history" to try to make their cases.
He could issue a PI on all of the cases and also give the state the months and months of time it wants to develop it's history while the public gets it's proper 2a protections returned.
Everybody is happy that way.
Then he can rule on the cases much later after the state has taken as much time as they want.
That technically keeps the cases out of the hands of the 9th because without a judgement to overturn, the 9th likely does not have any control over the case until it finishes in the lower court.

That hasn't stopped the State or BATFE from running to the Appeals Court about the PI issued in other cases. I'm thinking about ongoing cases in NY & Texas.

I believe that the State can file an Interlocutory Appeal and get the 9th to stay the Preliminary Injunction. That is what was done in Rhode back in 2020.

NOTICE OF INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL to the 9th Circuit as to 60 Order Granting Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction by Xavier Becerra.

EMERGENCY MOTION UNDER CIRCUIT RULE 27-3 TO STAY PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ORDER PENDING APPEAL

It would be nice if Benitez could make the 9th CA judges and Bonta work through the holiday. Although, they probably enjoy feasting on our rights far more than a big turkey and spending time with their families.

[Bargearse]

Maybe the Judge likes bowling?

Setting up all the defendants lawyers as pins?

STEEERIKE!!!!!

I sense that.

Be prepared to take your day off from work that day and use your credit card to buy everything you want. Freedom week II

Im prepared and ready!

[ritter]

I believe that the State can file an Interlocutory Appeal and get the 9th to stay the Preliminary Injunction. That is what was done in Rhode back in 2020.

Can plaintiffs then file an appeal of the 9th's decision on an injunction to SCOTUS? It would seem, at least with Duncan, that SCOTUS found error with the 9th's decision, thus GVRd it. Miller is very similar to Bianchi, which was also GVRd. I can't imagine the state or the 9th can say it's on better footing post Bruen with a straight face. It would seem SCOTUS would have an interest in an injunction while the state continues to screw around with magazines and assault weapons. These are both very clear "common use" "dangerous and unusual" thresholds with no tradition to support the regulation.

[ar15barrels]

Can plaintiffs then file an appeal of the 9th's decision on an injunction to SCOTUS? It would seem, at least with Duncan, that SCOTUS found error with the 9th's decision, thus GVRd it. Miller is very similar to Bianchi, which was also GVRd. I can't imagine the state or the 9th can say it's on better footing post Bruen with a straight face. It would seem SCOTUS would have an interest in an injunction while the state continues to screw around with magazines and assault weapons. These are both very clear "common use" "dangerous and unusual" thresholds with no tradition to support the regulation.

Yes.
They call that off docket filing.
The filing is for an emergency stay of the 9ths stay.

[ritter]

Yes.
They call that off docket filing.
The filing is for an emergency stay of the 9ths stay.

Thank you. I wonder what the chances are of SCOTUS enforcing the injunction. It is a constitutional issue which was just ruled on with 4(?) other 2A cases GVRd and very clearly the state, and presumptively, the 9th will have gone demonstrably far afield on the analysis, especially with regard to the standard of review and the likelihood of success.

[taperxz]

I believe that the State can file an Interlocutory Appeal and get the 9th to stay the Preliminary Injunction. That is what was done in Rhode back in 2020.




It would be nice if Benitez could make the 9th CA judges and Bonta work through the holiday. Although, they probably enjoy feasting on our rights far more than a big turkey and spending time with their families.

[Offwidth]

This thread wanders around more than homeless people.

Better than just sitting there in a puddle of own piss.

[bugsy714]

This thread wanders around more than homeless people.

Maybe we should nominate the thread for president

[Silence Dogood]

I’m guessing the scheduling isn’t a mistake. Could he just issue a PI until he issues his ruling?

I believe that the State can file an Interlocutory Appeal and get the 9th to stay the Preliminary Injunction. That is what was done in Rhode back in 2020.

Can plaintiffs then file an appeal of the 9th's decision on an injunction to SCOTUS? It would seem, at least with Duncan, that SCOTUS found error with the 9th's decision, thus GVRd it. Miller is very similar to Bianchi, which was also GVRd. I can't imagine the state or the 9th can say it's on better footing post Bruen with a straight face. It would seem SCOTUS would have an interest in an injunction while the state continues to screw around with magazines and assault weapons. These are both very clear "common use" "dangerous and unusual" thresholds with no tradition to support the regulation.

Yes.
They call that off docket filing.
The filing is for an emergency stay of the 9ths stay.

Thank you. I wonder what the chances are of SCOTUS enforcing the injunction. It is a constitutional issue which was just ruled on with 4(?) other 2A cases GVRd and very clearly the state, and presumptively, the 9th will have gone demonstrably far afield on the analysis, especially with regard to the standard of review and the likelihood of success.

Sorry, IANAL. Question for someone who is:

If. . .
1. Benitez files PI stoping enforcement of these unconstitutional laws,
2. Bonta files interlocutory appeal,
3. 9th CA stays the PI
4. Plaintiff’s off docket filing seeks emergency stay of stay of PI,
5. and SCOTUS stays 9th’s stay of Benitez’ PI
. . . would it be precedent that could be used against similar unconstitutional laws (e.g. Joe Biden: “Ban them. Ban them. Ban them.”) or just writing on the wall indicating what the outcome of a final decision would be should this case or a similar one make its way to this SCOTUS?

[Bhobbs]

I do have to wonder if Duncan and Bianchi both being GVR’d by SCOTUS might keep them from staying the PI. I guess this would also be a good indicator of how seriously the 9th takes Bruen.

[ritter]

I do have to wonder if Duncan and Bianchi both being GVR’d by SCOTUS might keep them from staying the PI. I guess this would also be a good indicator of how seriously the 9th takes Bruen.

If I had to put money on which way the 9th will go, it would be on them finding magazines, AWB "features" and bullets are accessories and not protected by the plain text of the 2A. There will be a liberal sprinkling of dangerous or unusual (despite the obvious error of this). Recall, this is the same court that recently found the 2A contains no right, whatsoever, to bear. So, either they can't read or they give not a shingle ***** about SCOTUS or the constitution. Could be both. They'll use this to craft a response regarding likelihood of success and flatten the injunction.