9th Circuit upholds "high capacity" magazine bans.

[Denny347]

Now the 9th is the most overturned Circuit by the USSC but I don't see this issue going there. This could have ripple effects in other Circuits. Something to watch.
Gun rights showdown: Sunnyvale restrictions upheld by appeals court - San Jose Mercury News

 

[AmmoManAaron]

Ruh-roh! My Scooby-sense says danger lies ahead.

 

[SSGSAD]

If you want MY magazines .....

 

[T.Lex]

The real issue in that case is not high-cap magazines. The issue will be a more structural - how "strict" should courts be when they review such laws.

"Strict scrutiny" is the hardest to overcome and is, for example, what is (mostly) used to examine 1st amendment issues. "Intermediate scrutiny" is not as strict, so makes it more likely that the law will be upheld.

The opinion:
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/03/04/14-15408.pdf

(Tried to cut and paste, but the formatting got messed up so as to be unreadable.)

The 9th applied intermediate scrutiny, rationalizing that the large cap ban was not as infringing as the Heller complete ban.

Unlike the district court in that other recent case (from Texas, I think), the court did not even try a strict scrutiny analysis. If they had, the law would have likely failed.

Because there is a structural question - what level of scrutiny - I tend to think the Supremes might be interested in this.

 

[AmmoManAaron]

Yes, strict scrutiny vs. intermediate scrutiny is the most important judicial topic at hand because it will lay or destroy the foundation of future suits that seek to restore our firearms freedoms.

 

[Thor]

The 9th Circus...but of course. Given the amount of everyone else's time they have wasted it would be a good move for a future administration to defund them and transfer their cases elsewhere.

 

[KLB]

Is there a similar lawsuit in progress in the NE yet?

 

[KellyinAvon]

Is this Bizarro World?
[h=1]Liberal 9th Circuit surprises with pro-2nd Amendment decision blocking California ammo ban[/h]
Second Amendment activists were given a surprise boost this week when the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals backed a lower court’s decision to suspend California’s ban on the possession of large magazines.

Activists, supported by the National Rifle Association, have argued that the state's ban on ownership of magazines holding 10 bullets or more is unconstitutional. They won a preliminary injunction by a San Diego district court last year, and a three-judge panel on the Ninth Circuit backed that injunction Tuesday.

“This is a significant win for law-abiding gun owners in California,” Chris Cox, executive director of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action, said in a statement. “This unconstitutional law criminalizes mere possession of many standard capacity magazines and would instantly turn many law-abiding gun owners into criminals.”

Liberal 9th Circuit surprises with pro-2nd Amendment decision blocking California ammo ban | Fox News

 

[T.Lex]

Even in the 9th, judges are capable of relying on precedent that they may personally find objectionable to reach the correct legal result.

This was a narrow appellate issue that the district court judge had the benefit of deciding correctly.

 

[KLB]

Will it go before the whole 9th? Will they reach the same conclusion if it doesn?

 

[T.Lex]

Will it go before the whole 9th? Will they reach the same conclusion if it doesn?

This was a 3 judge panel, so yeah - the "other side" can ask for en banc review. The 9th has some funky rules about en banc, so I'm not really sure what that process is. I think there's a way for a group of the entire 9th to review or the entire-entire 9th.

Hard to tell if an en banc review would reach the same result. This is a 2-1 split. I only skimmed the opinion and dissent, but my sense is that the district decision should be affirmed. But, I'm a 7th circuit guy.

 

[GIJEW]

Did I miss something here? san diego's ban is struck down but sunnyvale's is upheld? Talk about unequal protection before the law! Something is going to get reviewed and changed before this reaches SCOTUS!