Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

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

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • taperxz
    I need a LIFE!!
    • Feb 2010
    • 19395

    Originally posted by curtisfong
    If I were Benitez, I would start work on my own revised orders ready to go as soon as I heard of the GVR, knowing the 9th would force me to rewrite them.

    Then, as *soon* as they claim what I wrote originally was not consistent with Bruen, immediately file the newly rewritten order such that they were exactly the same, only with a few cosmetic changes to the judgement.
    Relief can also be sought as soon as it gets back to district court.

    Comment

    • Roswell Saucer
      Junior Member
      • Jun 2022
      • 77

      Originally posted by curtisfong
      It is possible he can do this, but I have no doubt the State will complain they would like the opportunity to re-litigate the entire case, preferably with a different judge.

      I am not a lawyer, though, so I don't know if there is anything that makes this impossible.

      Whatever conventions/rules are in place, I'm sure the 9th will find a way to defy them in a way to assist the State with whatever they need to win.
      On what grounds would the state have to get a new judge? Simply, "I don't like that he cares about the Constitution" isn't cause for a new judge. Plaintiffs should seek an injunction ASAP as we all know Benitez will grant it.
      Last edited by Roswell Saucer; 08-01-2022, 5:47 PM.

      Comment

      • curtisfong
        Calguns Addict
        • Jan 2009
        • 6893

        Originally posted by Roswell Saucer
        On what grounds would the state have to get a new judge?
        Bonta - "Because this Judge is devastating to my case".

        9th circuit - "It is so ordered. We got ya, mah dude"
        The Rifle on the WallKamala Harris

        Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome

        Comment

        • Bhobbs
          I need a LIFE!!
          • Feb 2009
          • 11848

          At some point there has to be consequences for the 9ths active war against be constitution.

          Comment

          • taperxz
            I need a LIFE!!
            • Feb 2010
            • 19395

            Originally posted by curtisfong
            Bonta - "Because this Judge is devastating to my case".

            9th circuit - "It is so ordered. We got ya, mah dude"
            The Ninth circuit already knew how this judge would solve Miller the first time. What makes you think they expect a different outcome the second time?

            Comment

            • taperxz
              I need a LIFE!!
              • Feb 2010
              • 19395

              Originally posted by Bhobbs
              At some point there has to be consequences for the 9ths active war against be constitution.
              Its called relief from the law and the judge should grant it. If an appeals court issues another stay, you take it straight to SCOTUS for the relief.

              Comment

              • kuug
                Senior Member
                • Aug 2014
                • 773

                Just un ****ing believable with these people. Just a reminder they hate you and everything you people stand for. When we win, rub it in their faces. There is no winning graciously here, they want to imprison you for your rights.


                Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                Comment

                • CGZ
                  Senior Member
                  • Nov 2014
                  • 990

                  Just saw a YouTube short from Reno May stating that this case was remanded back down to the district court (in this case Judge Benitez). He will likely rule in favor of the 2A again, though I wonder how he'd handle implementation of a stay this time. Could be in for another 'freedom week' in the coming months.

                  Comment

                  • curtisfong
                    Calguns Addict
                    • Jan 2009
                    • 6893

                    The question is if "remand for further proceedings" results in a new trial (and/or judge) or not, and whether or not Benitez can flatly deny a new trial is needed.

                    Any lawyers know if there is anything Benitez can do to prevent a new trial, with a new judge? Can he just file new orders that are "consistent" with Bruen, by fiat?

                    If not, I predict a new trial, with a new judge, and a win for Bonta at the district court, and the 9th, then yet another appeal to SCOTUS, this time without a conservative majority - in 20 years.
                    Last edited by curtisfong; 08-01-2022, 6:01 PM.
                    The Rifle on the WallKamala Harris

                    Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome

                    Comment

                    • Roswell Saucer
                      Junior Member
                      • Jun 2022
                      • 77

                      Originally posted by curtisfong
                      The question is if "remand for further proceedings" results in a new trial (and/or judge) or not, and whether or not Benitez can flatly deny a new trial is needed.

                      Any lawyers know if there is anything Benitez can do to prevent a new trial, with a new judge? Can he just file new orders that are "consistent" with Bruen, by fiat?

                      If not, I predict a new trial, with a new judge, and a win for Bonta at the district court, and the 9th, then yet another appeal to SCOTUS, this time without a conservative majority - in 20 years.
                      It goes back to Benitez. California doesn't get to choose a new judge because their fee fees are hurted.

                      Comment

                      • TheNinja
                        Member
                        • Nov 2011
                        • 275

                        So basically round and round we go with no change at this point? It's kind of what we expected, right? Courts are going to drag their heels and just pass it around so they don't have to abide by supreme court and the constitution

                        Comment

                        • SpookyWatcher
                          Member
                          • Apr 2015
                          • 159

                          Comment

                          • NorCalBusa
                            Senior Member
                            • Dec 2006
                            • 1497

                            Originally posted by CGZ
                            Just saw a YouTube short from Reno May stating that this case was remanded back down to the district court (in this case Judge Benitez). He will likely rule in favor of the 2A again, though I wonder how he'd handle implementation of a stay this time. Could be in for another 'freedom week' in the coming months.
                            Not thinking Reno May is the go-to for legal opinion, do as you see fit.
                            If you don't know where you are going, any road will take you there

                            Comment

                            • abinsinia
                              Veteran Member
                              • Feb 2015
                              • 4113

                              Temporary Restraining Order ?

                              Comment

                              • Roswell Saucer
                                Junior Member
                                • Jun 2022
                                • 77

                                From what I can tell from the 9th Circuit's order it's now immediately back under Benitez's jurisdiction. I feel like plaintiff should immediately file for an injunction. Benitez would undoubtedly grant it. Then, if California appeals which they certainly would, it can be fast tracked all the way to SCOTUS. I suspect Justice Thomas and rest of the the Bruen Six are less than pleased with the 9th's obstinance.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                UA-8071174-1