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

[Usual_Suspect]

I wonder of the State has someone sitting in the 9th's Filing Office with prefilled out stay requests.

[gun toting monkeyboy]

I am waiting to see what happens with the 9th. We are all fairly certain that the 9th will **** around. The question is whether or not they will find out when they do. I don't think they will be able to trip this one up like they did with Duncan. Both because the circumstances are different, and because trying their shenanigans twice in a row might get them smacked down pretty hard.

[AlmostHeaven]

The real value of not having a stay in effect would have been the opening of a narrow window to convert existing rifles into full-featured configurations using parts.

[not4un]

I am in the middle of reading the opinion, CA was tasked with providing with providing historical tradition of firearm regulation. Benetiz calls out CA argument for being racists......

"Incredibly, the State asks this Court to treat as analogues 38 laws on the State’s list
which applied only to particular disfavored people groups, such as slaves, Blacks, or
Mulattos. Those laws are not relevant to the “assault weapon” ban challenged in this
case. Even if they were, this Court would give such discriminatory laws little or no
weight."

[rplaw]

There's still work to get there. They have to open the case with the court of appeals, then they file the emergency motion. Maybe it's done already , but the district court docket just has the notice of appeal.

It's cut & paste into a new document. The State could have filed the notice and the emergency stay request at the same time. It's not like they need to do any research or new briefing, it's going to be the same argument they used in Duncan. 2 hours tops in edits and file.

[LEAD LAUNCHER]

Bonta Response

https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-appeals-misguided-district-court-decision-assault-weapons

.

[ForceOfNature]

"Like Baghdad Bob during the first Gulf War in 1991, the State clings to a wish" - Line 15, p. 74

lol

[rplaw]

The real value of not having a stay in effect would have been the opening of a narrow window to convert existing rifles into full-featured configurations using parts.

I don't think there's any value there. You couldn't order and receive a new one and if you had reconfigured a RAW, the stay would merely order that you not do it or face the legal consequences of having a previously registered but now unregistered RAW or non RAW which is now illegal.

SCOTUS isn't going to care that the window was open for a few minutes and intercede on your behalf.

[rplaw]

Bonta Response

https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-appeals-misguided-district-court-decision-assault-weapons

.

The press release is the same argument that Benitez found insufficient coupled with the same lies about how frequently AR's are supposedly used in committing crimes backed up with the refusal to acknowledge that precedent says those arms are exactly what are protected by the 2A.

Typical hogwash.

[TruOil]

Could someone please explain to me in a very detailed judicial explanation the point of granting a 10 day stay?

The purpose of a stay is to maintain the status quo during the appeal. Here, the trial court decision is a massive change to the law with long lasting effects, as the trial court decision will allow a new glut of "assault weapons" to be sold in California. Before that happens, the inclination of the courts is to say, "Hold on a minute, we'd better make sure the judge was right before we allow the decision to go into effect."

[randomBytes]

I love the way he eviscerated the states "expert" witnesses

[repoman1984]

The purpose of a stay is to maintain the status quo during the appeal. Here, the trial court decision is a massive change to the law with long lasting effects, as the trial court decision will allow a new glut of "assault weapons" to be sold in California. Before that happens, the inclination of the courts is to say, "Hold on a minute, we'd better make sure the judge was right before we allow the decision to go into effect."

Thank you for posting this, so what you are saying is nothing is changing for the next ten days, and the CA gov is expecting to appeal this win of ours within the next 10 days, so this is not like magazine freedom week? Correct? If the State fails to appeal after ten days then it is new law until they appeal and the CA AW ban does not exist in that time period? yes?

[AlmostHeaven]

The purpose of a stay is to maintain the status quo during the appeal. Here, the trial court decision is a massive change to the law with long lasting effects, as the trial court decision will allow a new glut of "assault weapons" to be sold in California. Before that happens, the inclination of the courts is to say, "Hold on a minute, we'd better make sure the judge was right before we allow the decision to go into effect."

Unfortunately, perpetually maintaining the status quo and continuing the infringements of the right to keep and bear arms has done nothing except help the state, within the context of gun rights litigation.

[RickD427]

Thank you for posting this, so what you are saying is nothing is changing for the next ten days, and the CA gov is expecting to appeal this win of ours within the next 10 days, so this is not like magazine freedom week? Correct? If the State fails to appeal after ten days then it is new law until they appeal and the CA AW ban does not exist in that time period? yes?

The state has already filed their notice of appeal: https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/atta...f%20Appeal.pdf

[Oneaudiopro]

I have to admit I'm a bit more optimistic about this decision than I was on the LCM decision. Benitez did a good job on his decision on LCM's but was even MORE specific on this decision as to not leave any valid arguments for the State to use in their appeal. He dissected their argument on interest balancing very nicely. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.