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

[Bhobbs]

Justice Barrett is getting involved in one of the Illinois cases. The plaintiffs appealed in Herrera v Raoul and asked SCOTUS to review. Justice Barrett ordered the state to give a response. We might see something sooner than later.

[SpudmanWP]

The Illinois PICA case was just sent to the Supreme Court and Justice Barret has requested a reply by May 8th.

https://twitter.com/FPCAction/status/1653116948253646848?t=0Agz0p961oUcN3-_4-0zwQ&s=19

Things are getting spicy.

Sorry, I forgot that IL has SO many suits ongoing and I was thinking about het 4-in-1 PI that came last week.

[Spyder]

Unfortunately, it is likely that will require a separate challenge, since semi-automatic firearms deemed assault weapons are much easier to argue as covered by the "in common use for lawful purposes" test promulgated in Heller, than specifically 50-caliber weapons. Any assault weapons ban court ruling may not apply directly.

Could it, potentially, cause problems for or be related to a situation where someone who has a RAW that they put one of the 50 BMG uppers on could run afoul? I can't recall specifically without looking it up, but an AR15 RAW can have a 50BMG upper installed on it and be legal because it's already a AW, right? If AW's go away, it may immediately put people in legal peril.

[Bhobbs]

Justice Barrett is getting involved in one of the Illinois cases. The plaintiffs appealed in Herrera v Raoul and asked SCOTUS to review. Justice Barrett ordered the state to give a response. We might see something sooner than later.

[BlessedHunter]

I believe the appeal to SCOTUS is asking to grant the PI?

Let's say Justice Barrett grants the PI. Would it then still have to make its way through the 7th Circuit or could she issue a ruling on the merits of the case?

[AlmostHeaven]

A single justice definitely cannot issue a ruling on the merits by him/herself. Justice Barrett would have to refer the matter to the full court.

I think it is procedurally possible for the Supreme Court to consolidate all the lower court assault weapons ban cases (Fourth, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits) together into a single "unified" case.

[Sputnik]

A single justice definitely cannot issue a ruling on the merits by him/herself. Justice Barrett would have to refer the matter to the full court.

I think it is procedurally possible for the Supreme Court to consolidate all the lower court assault weapons ban cases (Fourth, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits) together into a single "unified" case.

That might be interesting. But I won?t hold my breath.

[BlessedHunter]

A single justice definitely cannot issue a ruling on the merits by him/herself. Justice Barrett would have to refer the matter to the full court.

I think it is procedurally possible for the Supreme Court to consolidate all the lower court assault weapons ban cases (Fourth, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits) together into a single "unified" case.

I guess then a PI for the ban in Illinois is the only short term outcome from this.

That being said, it'd be quite the circus act if they consolidated and then somehow all states involved had to defend in front of SCOTUS.

[AlmostHeaven]

That being said, it'd be quite the circus act if they consolidated and then somehow all states involved had to defend in front of SCOTUS.

So many of the anti-gun arguments are the same, the proceedings might not be as circus-like as it initially would seem. All the defendants use interest balancing and "dangerousness" to argue in favor of their bans on semi-automatic rifles.

A consolidated case might even be a great scenario for our side, in that instead of fighting eleven different state governments using legal resources spread across twenty different gun rights organizations, it would be one ultimate battle in front of the highest court of the land. Maybe we could hire Paul Clement again like in NYSRPA v. Bruen.

[1911su16b870]

https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22A948.html

Excellent reading here...Justice Barrett 7th Circuit possible SCOTUS smack down incoming.

[JiuJitsu]

That was a really well-written brief, in my opinion. That could be a rough template to use for many hardware bans seeking PI?s. It really hits all the biggest points nicely.

[Sgt Raven]

So many of the anti-gun arguments are the same, the proceedings might not be as circus-like as it initially would seem. All the defendants use interest balancing and "dangerousness" to argue in favor of their bans on semi-automatic rifles.

A consolidated case might even be a great scenario for our side, in that instead of fighting eleven different state governments using legal resources spread across twenty different gun rights organizations, it would be one ultimate battle in front of the highest court of the land. Maybe we could hire Paul Clement again like in NYSRPA v. Bruen.

If we look at all the AWB cases & new laws. The anti side has Brady, Everytown, & Giffords fingerprints all over them. They help write the laws and help defend them.

[Ishooter]

If we look at all the AWB cases & new laws. The anti side has Brady, Everytown, & Giffords fingerprints all over them. They help write the laws and help defend them.

You're right on. The question is who are actually behind funding those organizations?

[rplaw]

https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/...ic/22A948.html

Excellent reading here...Justice Barrett 7th Circuit possible SCOTUS smack down incoming.

That is one heck of a well written brief. If the 7th did indeed do what is claimed that they have done, the circuit deserves a rebuff and reprimand from the SCOTUS.

[TruOil]

That is one heck of a well written brief. If the 7th did indeed do what is claimed that they have done, the circuit deserves a rebuff and reprimand from the SCOTUS.

Yeah but...You remember what happened the last time the Supreme Court was asked to intervene when an injunction was denied under identical circumstances. All they did was urge the Second Circuit to act expeditiously.