Question about AW cases (Rupp and Miller)

[enorbit3]

Hey everyone. Can someone please explain the difference between Rupp v Becerra and Miller v Becerra?

I know they are both related to AW bans, but after reading the complaint in both, I cant really determine the difference. Rupp's complaint by CRPA was clear and concise, well outlined and went into great detail. In contrast, Miller's complaint wasn't as detailed and only a page or two.

If we are successfull in Rupp, does that mean that Miller is moot?

Sorry if this has been answered before but I couldn't find anything that explained the difference in the cases.

[BBot12]

https://youtu.be/4ZEaVfHLkog

[enorbit3]

thank you for that. I enjoy his videos and now its a bit more clear.

[BryMan92]

Perhaps my oversimplified answer:

Rupp: "Assault weapons" with detachable magazines.
Miller: "Assault weapons" with fixed magazines.

I think Miller is saying the fixed-magazine limit of 10 rounds is now in disagreement with Duncan.

[enorbit3]

Thank you Bryman. That's about as plain as it gets but easiest to digest

[Uncivil Engineer]

Perhaps my oversimplified answer:

Rupp: "Assault weapons" with detachable magazines.
Miller: "Assault weapons" with fixed magazines.

I think Miller is saying the fixed-magazine limit of 10 rounds is now in disagreement with Duncan.

I think that is how Miller started. I believe it was strategic to get transferred to Benitez. Recall that Duncan was just about grandfathered magazines then Benitez tossed out the entire law. I think Miller was trying to take the same track. Get the case infront of Benitez then try to expand the scope and undo all of the AW laws.