Peņa v. Cid (Handgun Roster) **CERT DENIED 6-15-2020**

[nyla]

I am praying that they take the case.

[Librarian]

Docket page - https://www.supremecourt.gov/search....ic/18-843.html

No update there, so I don't know. Can't seem to locate it on SCOTUSBlog.

Re-lists seem to come out on Mondays.

[taperxz]

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...postcount=2831 - Distributed for the decide-whether-to-grant conference of April 12.

Might get re-distributed a few times, but if they consider and decide on normal schedule, should announce the decision the following week.

Fingers crossed. Or, did this get re-listed?

[BAJ475]

So, 2 days until the initial conference and, I assume, we'll get an update on Monday, the 15th (Tax Day).

We can hope that the Benitex hardware test has inspired the conservatives on the court to conclude that it is time to clarify that this is, and always has been, the proper test. Simple and easy to apply and requires no balancing.

[Paladin]

So, 2 days until the initial conference and, I assume, we'll get an update on Monday, the 15th (Tax Day).

[Offwidth]

Look into a Glock 20. It is on the roster and has 15rd mags available (CA model will come with 10rf).
You may not be a Glock guy, but there are options if open to other brands. I have a Glock 29, which is the subcompact 10mm.
I believe Dan Wesson also has a 10mm 1911 on roster, but don't quote me on that.

[Rail]

Watch closely what happens with the Ninth Circuit over the mag ban (injunctions/stays, etc) if SCOTUS grants cert on this case. Taking two 2A cases within months of each other means they will take more, and will be a warning sign to the anti circuits.

I'm convinced the reason the DC Circuit declined an en banc rehearing of Wrenn in 2017 was that they knew Kennedy would be retiring the following year.

[WoodTurner]

Thanks for the info. It's sort of a pipe dream since I'm really intrigued by the new XD 10mm. The 10mm is a new caliber to the XD line which is being sold in CA in other calibers, so I'm hoping someday to see the 10mm in CA as well. Especially with 15 round mags!

Look into a Glock 20. It is on the roster and has 15rd mags available (CA model will come with 10rf).
You may not be a Glock guy, but there are options if open to other brands. I have a Glock 29, which is the subcompact 10mm.
I believe Dan Wesson also has a 10mm 1911 on roster, but don't quote me on that.

[estrom]

There are multiple things handguns need, depending on the time they were submitted for testing, in order to be allowed on the roster.
You could read through this for a little understanding on how firearms are submitted.

https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Document/I80547680380011E18024FEFE7CFA98B6?viewType=FullText&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)

The biggest problem now is micro microstamping. Any gun that wasn't already on the roster before May 2013 requires microstamping in order for California to except it for the roster. Since no firearms have it (and I believe no one has the technology yet) we have a problem.
There are other things that kept guns off of the roster even before microstamping went into effect. Things like magazine disconnect and loaded chamber indicator. Then there is the fact that some manufacturers just don't want to deal with it or pay the fees. I believe Smith and Wesson just gave up on California and dropped multiple handguns off the roster by not renewing them.

Thanks for the info. It's sort of a pipe dream since I'm really intrigued by the new XD 10mm. The 10mm is a new caliber to the XD line which is being sold in CA in other calibers, so I'm hoping someday to see the 10mm in CA as well. Especially with 15 round mags!

[WoodTurner]

I'm definitely no lawyer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn once...could the Duncan ruling be used as an argument against the roster? Aren't some of the guns, particularly hand guns, on the roster because of capacity? The new Springfield XD 10mm would be an example since it only comes with 15 round magazines.

There are multiple things handguns need, depending on the time they were submitted for testing, in order to be allowed on the roster.
You could read through this for a little understanding on how firearms are submitted.

https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Document/I80547680380011E18024FEFE7CFA98B6?viewType=FullText&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)

The biggest problem now is micro microstamping. Any gun that wasn't already on the roster before May 2013 requires microstamping in order for California to except it for the roster. Since no firearms have it (and I believe no one has the technology yet) we have a problem.
There are other things that kept guns off of the roster even before microstamping went into effect. Things like magazine disconnect and loaded chamber indicator. Then there is the fact that some manufacturers just don't want to deal with it or pay the fees. I believe Smith and Wesson just gave up on California and dropped multiple handguns off the roster by not renewing them.

[estrom]

I'm definitely no lawyer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn once...could the Duncan ruling be used as an argument against the roster? Aren't some of the guns, particularly hand guns, on the roster because of capacity? The new Springfield XD 10mm would be an example since it only comes with 15 round magazines.

[Caleb1911]

FABIO will really get goosed on this

The opinion never evaluates the regulation under rational basis, which in my mind could be one of the more interesting issues on appeal. Not that I think this one is going anywhere on appeal.

This case is now at the Supreme Court awaiting a certiorari decision.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/18-843.html

I just read the filings and amici curiae briefs. My humble prediction is that, contrary to what FABIO has said repeatedly, this "stinker" of a case is granted cert, becomes a win for gun owners in California, and will be used by the court to enunciate clear guidelines on how to adjudicate the constitutionality of gun control laws going forward. In a nutshell, my prediction is that this is the case on which FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!

[Harry Ono]

If the off roaster firearm is "unsafe" then why are police, feds, military, and security exempt? Selecting off roaster firearms has nothing to do with safety.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Exactly

[Harry Ono]

Ahhh, you need to look at the doublespeak as they don't say unsafe, but instead the certified list says "not unsafe". Anything else is just unknown and hasn't been checked yet.

As you say, it has nothing to do with safety. Once tested, it should always remain on the list, but it doesn't. The police should be required more than anyone else to have fired which are tested, but if they didn't exempt them, then it is likely that the law wouldn't have passed. It is all a scam to ban firearms.

substance vs form.... their use of doublespeak may not work. More over the State does not have its own versions of the federal consumer safety departments like the FDA/FTC/FTA or any other.

[Harry Ono]

.

I read the entirety of Judge Benitez's ruling in Duncan v. Becerra and I see no reason why that exact same in common use logic couldn't be used in regards to the roster, AWB and the latest ammo laws.

exactly !