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

[Bhobbs]

Maybe Trump appointing 3 new Justices had something to do with ending the delays. The Bruen 5 know some of them are getting up there in age, so they may have a short window to rule on these cases. They know Roberts is Squishy and could vote either way.

[SpudmanWP]

There is a process and it needs to play itself out. SCOTUS is just giving rouge Circuits like the 2nd enough rope to hang themselves.

[Sgt Raven]

They have to pick the right case. Let's see what they do when the 5th Circuit Cargill v. Garland bump stock case gets to them. Remember, "bad cases make bad case law".

[Bhobbs]

There is a process and it needs to play itself out. SCOTUS is just giving rouge Circuits like the 2nd enough rope to hang themselves.

They have been revolting for almost two decades.

[SpudmanWP]

SCOTUS gave them a chance to make good decisions based on Heller but since they couldn't help themselves, Bruen.

As others have said, Trump's greatest contribution to the history of the US will be the 3 judges he appointed to SCOTUS.

[Bhobbs]

SCOTUS gave them a chance to make good decisions based on Heller but since they couldn't help themselves, Bruen.

The 2nd circuit was their first test after Bruen and SCOTUS failed.

[Sgt Raven]

The 2nd circuit was their first test after Bruen and SCOTUS failed.

Just because SCOTUS didn't take the rare step of a interlocutory appeal, does not mean they failed. I think I'm using the right term. Either way, it would be unusual for SCOTUS to take the case before the Circuit Court of Appeals makes a final ruling on the case.



Yes all of us want them to move on it right now. But you have to admit we are in a better position, than we have been previously. I have been in the Gun Rights movement since the 1977 "Revolt in Cincinnati". I have never been as hopeful, as I have been since the Bruen ruling. We're planting trees that our grand-kids can sit under. Even if I don't enjoy the shade from them.

[SpudmanWP]

it would be unusual for SCOTUS to take the case before the Circuit Court of Appeals makes a final ruling on the case.

It would have even been rarer than that as the 2nd had not scheduled any hearings, not held any hearings, not written any opinions, etc. Literally, nothing had happened other than the 2nd putting issuing an unsupported Stay.

I am not sure where some people get the idea that SCOTUS jumps into cases on the flimsiest of pretenses, but our judicial system is the best BECAUSE it works relatively slowly. This lets people understand the process better and keeps a-holes from making too many changes too quickly. This is also why we have 3 branches of government, two chambers in Congress, etc.

[Bhobbs]

Just because SCOTUS didn't take the rare step of a interlocutory appeal, does not mean they failed. I think I'm using the right term. Either way, it would be unusual for SCOTUS to take the case before the Circuit Court of Appeals makes a final ruling on the case.



Yes all of us want them to move on it right now. But you have to admit we are in a better position, than we have been previously. I have been in the Gun Rights movement since the 1977 "Revolt in Cincinnati". I have never been as hopeful, as I have been since the Bruen ruling. We're planting trees that our grand-kids can sit under. Even if I don't enjoy the shade from them.

[SpudmanWP]

Laws respecting 2A protected rights have been increasing in the last few decades, not decreasing. Just look at any "Permitless Carry" map if you need proof. Heller, Caetano, Bruen, etc have been taking chunks out of state's backsides in their attempt to infringe on our rights. This whole post-Bruen spat of "response" bills are just that, a baby throwing a fit. They won't and have not been lasting. Given the Duncan & Bianchi GVRs, those issues have already been decided as far as SCOTUS is concerned and when they make their way back, SCOTUS will rule accordingly. Expect several Caetano-like per-curiam decisions over the next few years, especially on BS like "magazines are not arms", "pistol grips, forends, & optics are not arms", etc.

I don't know why you say "you guys may be willing to risk" as we do not have any direct influence on what the courts do outside of electing leaders that will be appointing the judges. Again, this is what I think Trump will be most known for in the annals of history.

About the only thing that you can directly do is file civil rights cases against politicians & courts. Hey, it's your money.

[Gator15]

It would have even been rarer than that as the 2nd had not scheduled any hearings, not held any hearings, not written any opinions, etc. Literally, nothing had happened other than the 2nd putting issuing an unsupported Stay.

I am not sure where some people get the idea that SCOTUS jumps into cases on the flimsiest of pretenses, but our judicial system is the best BECAUSE it works relatively slowly. This lets people understand the process better and keeps a-holes from making too many changes too quickly. This is also why we have 3 branches of government, two chambers in Congress, etc.

That is fine if the courts err on the side of citizens rights, not so good if the courts refuse to enjoin laws that raise civil rights questions. The latter is how it usually works, but that is precisely when such laws should be enjoined until the government can establish that the law is constitutional.

[SpudmanWP]

If they keep this up, someone will eventually sue for a "consent decree" style of preemption in the process of making new 2A laws. States are actually increasing the likelihood of something like this happening with their obviously infringing "Bruen Repaonce Bills".

[CurlyDave]

... but our judicial system is the best BECAUSE it works relatively slowly...

The Sullivan Act in New York was passed in 1911. It looks to me like we have had at least 112 years of infringement. That is a whole lot more than "relatively slowly." And the laws are still in effect.

Entire generations have lived and died under this yoke. We, the people, are getting restless.

[BAJ475]

The Sullivan Act in New York was passed in 1911. It looks to me like we have had at least 112 years of infringement. That is a whole lot more than "relatively slowly." And the laws are still in effect.

Entire generations have lived and died under this yoke. We, the people, are getting restless.

With that view you will enjoy Unintended Consequences by John Ross! It's long and unfortunately Mr. Ross is no longer with us to autograph your personal copy. But you might enjoy a video he made about Mark 7 reloading presses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4t9RoTtJN20

[SpudmanWP]

The Sullivan act, in and of itself, was not the problem that lead up to Bruen. It was the abuse of it that did. Some states started as "may issue", but they were reasonable about it and did not raise the ire of SCOTUS. Along eth way they even went "shall issue" and "permitless carry" all on their own.

NY took it too far which gave us Bruen.

Prior to Bruen the Judicial system did not have clear & concise instructions on how to rule on 2A issues. As we have seen post-Bruen (largely due to Bruen "response" bills), there have been well over a hundred 2A suits that have, for the most part, been winning handily in court. Even the "losses" have been temporary.

This is why I call it a 2ATidalWave, because it is wiping clear the landscape of fascist state & local laws. It will take at least a year for all the dust to settle, but this is a truly historic time to be part of the 2A community.