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

[megaman010391@gmail.com]

When will the case be heard? Is it this month?

I think he will write opinion and it's up to the 9th circuit how they want to take it. Either case have your credit cards ready to buy the magazines LOL.

[Bhobbs]

Better question is, when will he give his rulling? Than again he already did. So either he lifts the ban until an appeal is giving. Who knows.

[SpudmanWP]

The first time he had to "go against the grain" of the 2-part test.
This time the groundwork has been laid out for him in a clear & concise manner.
He does not have to justify anything, not need to convince anybody.
It's up to the state to make its case and all he has to do is refute it.

Based on the 5-page summary briefs, that should be easy

[Drivedabizness]

^^^this^^^^

SCOTUS has already affirmed that St Benitez' read of the 2A is (and was) the correct one. He's given the other side many months of consideration, in spite of the fact that every one of their arguments fail, badly. In any other circumstance, we'd be skewering him for letting them F*ck us for so long. Bear that in mind.

[dawgcasa]

His ruling was basically thrown in the trash, so he will have to write a new one. If I remember right, the first time it took from mid March to early May. Hopefully he’s faster this time.

While Benitez will have to write a new ruling, he will assuredly re-use much of his legal reasoning in his prior ruling since he did a good job of covering text, history, and tradition and only addressed the “two step” as a nod to the inevitable appeal to the 9th Circuit. In this new ruling he will need to refute the position put forward by defendants, including their attempt to drag “interest balancing” back into the argument. He will need to put a nail in the coffin of interest balancing since it is the favorite anti-2A weapon of the 9th Circuit. He will also need to lay out a water tight argument on the text, history, and tradition surrounding the past statutes defendants attempt to leverage into the present as a moat that the 9th Circuit will have to attack if they wish to overturn his ruling. Everyone knows the 9th will want to reverse … Benitez’ ruling must force them to go to ridiculous lengths of obvious pretzel logic that openly defies Bruen to do so, for the eventual smack down by SCOTUS.

[pratchett]

So, to clarify... assuming Miller v. Bonta ultimately goes our way:
1 of 2) We would still not be able to "import" new AR15 pistols into the state for DROS as semi-auto pistols?
2 of 2) But, if someone already owns an AR15 pistol DROSd as a semi-auto-pistol, that person would be able to remove the magazine lock?

[jcwatchdog]

So, to clarify... assuming Miller v. Bonta ultimately goes our way:
1 of 2) We would still not be able to "import" new AR15 pistols into the state for DROS as semi-auto pistols?
2 of 2) But, if someone already owns an AR15 pistol DROSd as a semi-auto-pistol, that person would be able to remove the magazine lock?

Yes to both.

[BAJ475]

So, to clarify... assuming Miller v. Bonta ultimately goes our way:
1 of 2) We would still not be able to "import" new AR15 pistols into the state for DROS as semi-auto pistols?

Correct, but that is because of the roster which Miller does not address.

2 of 2) But, if someone already owns an AR15 pistol DROSd as a semi-auto-pistol, that person would be able to remove the magazine lock?

Probably

[chris]

As much as I would love to have his ruling sooner. I can wait. Why? Well we want it to be tough to overturn it and also we want it so that when Newsom gets on TV to cry about it that he actually does or gets angry. I want to see that b*tch of a governor cry and cry and complain about it. We can all laugh and blow up his social media pages as well.

It will be a priceless moment to be well taken advantage of.

[Sgt Raven]

So, to clarify... assuming Miller v. Bonta ultimately goes our way:
1 of 2) We would still not be able to "import" new AR15 pistols into the state for DROS as semi-auto pistols?
2 of 2) But, if someone already owns an AR15 pistol DROSd as a semi-auto-pistol, that person would be able to remove the magazine lock?

I would say not only this. But if you own a AR pistol like a Juggernaut Tactical "AR-15 CA Pistol", which is on the Roster. You can change the upper assembly to one with a Gas Block & Tube & remove the Magazine Lock.

[dmcag69]

I don't think ar pistols are covered,there handguns not rifles

[abinsinia]

I don't think ar pistols are covered,there handguns not rifles

The AWB covers some handguns, for example ones with threaded barrels.

[CGZ]

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.casd.642089/gov.uscourts.casd.642089.116.0_1.pdf

30510 is the named "assault" weapons.

"30515(a)(1) through (8)
(a) Notwithstanding Section 30510, “assault weapon” also means any of the following:

(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of the following:
(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.

(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches.

(4) A semiautomatic pistol that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of the following:
(A) A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer.
(B) A second handgrip.
(C) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon without burning the bearer's hand, except a slide that encloses the barrel.
(D) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.

(5) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

(6) A semiautomatic shotgun that has both of the following:
(A) A folding or telescoping stock.
(B) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon, thumbhole stock, or vertical handgrip.

(7) A semiautomatic shotgun that does not have a fixed magazine.

(8) Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder.



So it appears AR/AK, etc pistols would be covered by #4

[Bhobbs]

As much as I would love to have his ruling sooner. I can wait. Why? Well we want it to be tough to overturn it and also we want it so that when Newsom gets on TV to cry about it that he actually does or gets angry. I want to see that b*tch of a governor cry and cry and complain about it. We can all laugh and blow up his social media pages as well.

It will be a priceless moment to be well taken advantage of.

[jcwatchdog]