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

[AlmostHeaven]

IMO, you would be able to restore your rifles to their "natural" state. The decision would invalidate the entire AW scheme. You should also be able to "unregister" any AWs catalogued in the state's system by written request to CA DOJ. You would have normal, semi-auto rifles.

Of course the emergency stay the state will unquestionably gain however-many-minutes after Judge B's ruling would likely call for a new registration under the previously enjoined rules. I'm not sure what that landscape would look like as "normal" rifles would be non-compliant again.

Perhaps someone else might have a better idea.

The most important result of a Judge Benitez Miller v. Bonta decision that denies an administrative stay arises from the fact that the state would have to choose whether to escalate the political stakes considerably by prosecuting people who would have acquired assault weapons during the brief period between the ruling and Ninth Circuit stay.

California conceded the grandfathering of large-capacity magazines in the Duncan v. Bonta appeal, suggesting that even the Newsom administration does not want to open such a large can of worms.

[TruOil]

California conceded the grandfathering of large-capacity magazines in the Duncan v. Bonta appeal, suggesting that even the Newsom administration does not want to open such a large can of worms.

The primary reason is that confiscation pf legally purchased magazines is a "taking" that requires the state to pay compensation.

[RickD427]

The primary reason is that confiscation pf legally purchased magazines is a "taking" that requires the state to pay compensation.

Please see Post #5666. The point being is that it may not necessarily fall under the "Takings" clause due to recent developments in the case law.

[newbieLA]

Now that Judge Benitez has seen that the 9th has zero respect for SCOTUS, he should NOT stay his order when he rules on Miller.

He should issue his ruling at 5pm on a Friday and let Bonta and the 9th scramble for 3 days to get an emergency stay by Monday. Not sure if that allows us to convert and keep our rifles in their intended configuration, but its clear there is absolutely no benefit for Benitez to stay any of his orders hence forth.

[WithinReason]

My perception of Judge Benitez is that he will be honorable, as his honorific suggests.

[homelessdude]

I hope tomorrow is the next step in this battle. We need some forward movement. Benitez's release especially with no stay would provide it.

[WithinReason]

I hope tomorrow is the next step in this battle. We need some forward movement. Benitez's release especially with no stay would provide it.

Agreed!

[M60A1Rise]

Even if it is a couple of hours, for most people that isn't enough time to pick up something locally, and online orders would likely be canceled before they are shipped.

Friend do you live near a Turners , Ammo Bros or any type of gun store ? If so you should already own a few flash hiders , pistol grips and any other items you would want to configure your rifle the way it was intended. You can own them they just can't be attached.........yet.

[yacko]

Friend do you live near a Turners , Ammo Bros or any type of gun store ? If so you should already own a few flash hiders , pistol grips and any other items you would want to configure your rifle the way it was intended. You can own them they just can't be attached.........yet.

And standard magazine release.... f da bullllitttt buttttttton!!!!!!!!

[ExuberantRaptorZeta]

Hopefully Judge Benitez makes this a Friday the 13th to remember by issuing his Miller ruling with no stay at 4 : 59 : 59 pm today!

[newbieLA]

Hopefully Judge Benitez makes this a Friday the 13th to remember by issuing his Miller ruling with no stay at 4 : 59 : 59 pm today!

That would be a big FU to the 9th, Bonta and Newsome

[michigander]

I?m not sure how much that helps us. The state and 9CA will both work OT to stay.

[Drivedabizness]

Don't be so sure of that. California offered folks the opportunity to register "Assault Weapons" during earlier bans to avoid having to pay compensation under the Fifth Amendment's "Takings" clause. The prevailing view, at the time, was that by making the weapons illegal to possess, they government had done a "Constructive Taking" of the property requiring that compensation be paid.

Since that time there has been some movement in the case law that when the government "takes" private property pursuant to its police power, and not for government use, that the "Takings" clause is not triggered. That view is not yet firmly established, but the legal foot is in the door.

Except of course that States may not use their "police" power to infringe on fundamental, enumerated rights.

[AlmostHeaven]

I'm not sure how much that helps us. The state and 9CA will both work OT to stay.

Even a miniscule window between a Judge Benitez order and Ninth Circuit stay would allow Californians to convert and manufacture assault weapons that the state would have to consider allowing registration. Prosecution would become immensely more difficult with the creation of a period where guns could legally have come into possession, similar to large-capacity magazines in Duncan v. Bonta.

[newbieLA]

Even a miniscule window between a Judge Benitez order and Ninth Circuit stay would allow Californians to convert and manufacture assault weapons that the state would have to consider allowing registration. Prosecution would become immensely more difficult with the creation of a period where guns could legally have come into possession, similar to large-capacity magazines in Duncan v. Bonta.

I hope you're right!