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

[CurlyDave]

I suspect that every cool paragraph he comes up with he needs to copy to the other three cases.

Modern computers make that part easy. I wonder what happens if he gets Chat GPT to write the decision?

I would be willing to contribute to developing an Artificial Intelligence to research and write favorable 2A papers and decisions.

[tast101]

My Guess is, he’s getting all 3 decisions done to drop them at the same time. Strike 1, Strike 2, Strike 3 Bonta your outttttt!!!

[NorCalBusa]

March 31st. Heard it at a poker game.

Side bet? How much is riding on it?

[Ned Ryerson]

My Guess is, he?s getting all 3 decisions done to drop them at the same time. Strike 1, Strike 2, Strike 3 Bonta your outttttt!!!

I think you’re right. It’s going to be a serious pummeling!

[Dirk Tungsten]

March 31st. Heard it at a poker game.

More likely the 30th, as the 31st is a state holiday (Cesar Chavez day)

[michigander]

More likely the 30th, as the 31st is a state holiday (Cesar Chavez day)

Sounds like a great day to release the ruling since this is a federal case.

[homelessdude]

Another 17 minutes?

[CGZ]

There's no way to know what time (or date) Judge Benitez will release his decision. One would think it would be during business hours, but we've also seen the state submit it's briefs close to, or even after midnight of the deadline date. Unfortunately court listener doesn't list the time something was filed, only the date (AFAIK). Though IIRC, the original judgement for Duncan was released in the afternoon. Either way it's been over a month now since the parties filed their briefs, so I would expect something any day now.

[gobler]

Is it certain that Benitez will issue his opinion in March?

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

[ASD1]

Is it certain that Benitez will issue his opinion in March?

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

NO!

He will do it when he thinks he has covered every angle and every scenario the state might try to work around it.

So it may take some time to get it prefect. An we want it to be because it's better he do it now rather than have to fight it later / again

[ASD1]

There's no way to know what time (or date) Judge Benitez will release his decision. One would think it would be during business hours, but we've also seen the state submit it's briefs close to, or even after midnight of the deadline date. Unfortunately court listener doesn't list the time something was filed, only the date (AFAIK). Though IIRC, the original judgement for Duncan was released in the afternoon. Either way it's been over a month now since the parties filed their briefs, so I would expect something any day now.

NO!

He will do it when he thinks he has covered every angle and every scenario the state might try to work around it.

So it may take some time to get it prefect. An we want it to be because it's better he do it now rather than have to fight it later / again

[pythonfan]

NO!

He will do it when he thinks he has covered every angle and every scenario the state might try to work around it.

So it may take some time to get it prefect. An we want it to be because it's better he do it now rather than have to fight it later / again

Agreed we don't want him publishing something that's prefect.

[pythonfan]

Side bet? How much is riding on it?

I'm not a gambling man. I was just watching the poker game.

[TruOil]

NO!

He will do it when he thinks he has covered every angle and every scenario the state might try to work around it.

So it may take some time to get it prefect. An we want it to be because it's better he do it now rather than have to fight it later / again

He could do that, but that won't stop the Ninth from concluding, "Nah, we disagree." I mean really, all you have to look at is its ridiculous opinion in Young v. Ohio that concluded that notwithstanding the clear language of the Second Amendment, there was no right to bear arms off of one's own property. Speaking an an attorney, the decision was a travesty of logic, misapplied and misquoted applicable ancient laws, ignored the historical discussion in Heller, and ran roughshod over the rights of Americans. Despite the warnings of Bruen, I wold not put it past them to do it again when his decision reaches them, as the Second appears poised to do on its review of the preliminary injunctions in the NY CCW restrictions cases.

[LW6PPC]

He could do that, but that won't stop the Ninth from concluding, "Nah, we disagree." I mean really, all you have to look at is its ridiculous opinion in Young v. Ohio that concluded that notwithstanding the clear language of the Second Amendment, there was no right to bear arms off of one's own property. Speaking an an attorney, the decision was a travesty of logic, misapplied and misquoted applicable ancient laws, ignored the historical discussion in Heller, and ran roughshod over the rights of Americans. Despite the warnings of Bruen, I wold not put it past them to do it again when his decision reaches them, as the Second appears poised to do on its review of the preliminary injunctions in the NY CCW restrictions cases.

I don't think that he is writing it for the 9th, I think he is writing it for SCOTUS.