Nguyen vs Becerra 2020-Dec: USDC SDCA: challenge new 1 in 30

[SpudmanWP]

This is ECF 60

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.casd.695583/gov.uscourts.casd.695583.60.0.pdf

If you look to the CL page and browse to 60, you will see a ton of links relating to the SJ.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18759616/nguyen-v-bonta/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc

Both parties have 7 days to submit proposed orders which the Court will then use to issue the final SJ Order.

[Bhobbs]

A 30 day stay is insane. How can you grant a summary judgement but stay the ruling? Maybe I’m wrong but I thought summary judgments were in cases where the law was blatantly unconstitutional.

We need wins that actually count.

[SpudmanWP]

30 days does seem a bit long to file an appeal but we'll have to wait for the order to see the details.

[Elgatodeacero]

Hopefully Plaintiffs counsel will file a motion to lift the stay with the merits panel.

Pretty ironic the judge gives a 30 day stay and we are blocked from exercising our 2nd Amendment rights more than once every 30 days.

We have a pretty abusive relationship with the federal court system.

[gunuser17]

Summary judgement is appropriate when there is no dispute as the material facts of the case. Since the law is determined by the judge, there is often summary judgment granted when the parties dispute the law - that is what happened here. Stays are not that unusual in my experience in civil cases where the matter turns on whether the judge properly determined and applied the law. i don't like it here but I don't think that you can say it is unusual for a civil case or that they only do it in a 2nd amend. case.

[Elgatodeacero]

A stay of judgment striking down a law found to violate an enumerated Constitutional right is quite unusual, and is now primarily and predominantly seen in 2nd Amendment cases and not others.

[BAJ475]

Where is post 51?

[Sgt Raven]

Where is post 51?

It is a bug in the forum software. The first post on a new page doesn't show, until a 2nd post is made. IDK if it happens every time or just some of the times. I've noticed it and made a new 2nd post for a new page in a thread and then the new page shows.

[AlmostHeaven]

Hopefully Plaintiffs counsel will file a motion to lift the stay with the merits panel.

Pretty ironic the judge gives a 30 day stay and we are blocked from exercising our 2nd Amendment rights more than once every 30 days.

We have a pretty abusive relationship with the federal court system.

A stay of judgment striking down a law found to violate an enumerated Constitutional right is quite unusual, and is now primarily and predominantly seen in 2nd Amendment cases and not others.

I strongly agree. I absolutely despise how liberal district courts issue injunctions against conservative policies such as the Trump administration travel ban, "gender-affirming care" for minors bans, and sexually explicit materials bans, with rapid speed and no stays, despite having no explicit constitutional basis, while every Second Amendment issue moves at the speed of tar and comes with administrative stays to facilitate easy appeals, which then continue to uphold enforcement of gun control statutes.

[splithoof]

I strongly agree. I absolutely despise how liberal district courts issue injunctions against conservative policies such as the Trump administration travel ban, "gender-affirming care" for minors bans, and sexually explicit materials bans, with rapid speed and no stays, despite having no explicit constitutional basis, while every Second Amendment issue moves at the speed of tar and comes with administrative stays to facilitate easy appeals, which then continue to uphold enforcement of gun control statutes.

Government + Judicial Activism = Multi Generational Enslavement

[natman]

A 30 day stay is insane. How can you grant a summary judgement but stay the ruling? Maybe I?m wrong but I thought summary judgments were in cases where the law was blatantly unconstitutional.

It can be, but not always. Summary judgements can be when there is no dispute about the meaning of the law (1 in 30 is relatively straightforward) and no dispute about the facts (the state is getting sued to overturn the law, so there's no need for evidence, witnesses, etc).

In this case BOTH sides asked for a summary judgement.

[TruOil]

It can be, but not always. Summary judgements can be when there is no dispute about the meaning of the law (1 in 30 is relatively straightforward) and no dispute about the facts (the state is getting sued to overturn the law, so there's no need for evidence, witnesses, etc).

In this case BOTH sides asked for a summary judgement.

The technical formulation is thus: Where there are no disputed issues of material fact, the court may decide the case as a matter of law.

Questions of fact are for the jury; and on summary judgment, a judge cannot weigh the evidence. Questions of law are decided by the judge, and where the material facts are undisputed, the court decides the case as a matter of law. It doesn't matter if the legal issues are disputed, as the judge gets to decide what the law is. It is also unnecessary for one party to be "blatantly" wrong, only that the law does not support that party's position.

[Librarian]

CRPA's email says

Yesterday, the District Court for the Southern District of California struck down the state’s ban on purchasing more than one handgun or semiautomatic, centerfire rifle in a 30-day period.

The court’s opinion minces no words in striking down the blatantly unconstitutional law, citing the lack of a historical analog as required under Bruen. The state weakly attempted to compare the law to 18th century licensing and tax laws, but Judge William Hayes dismissed the comparison as not "relevantly similar" to the one-a-month law.

"Once again the state tried to get past Bruen with the mistaken assumption that ANY firearm-related law in the past justifies ANY law now. Thankfully, the court held to the standard as it should be followed,” stated CRPA President & General Counsel Chuck Michel.

The state is certain to appeal and this decision is likely to be stayed pending that appeal, but we always celebrate a well-reasoned decision.

Side: CRPA folks, might you please post these nice updates on CRPA.org so they can be linked to?

[NorcalGSG]

So, the week they were granted to implement going to be a stay before we are allowed to exercise our rights and DROS 4 things st once?

[Sgt Raven]