Big decision from the 9th Circuit today - hi-cap mags legal in California again

[JTScribe]

To be fair, he said conservative judges, not Trump was. Trump has appointed generally conservative or originalist judges with his appointments

Case in point - the guy who wrote this decision. Sheesh.

 

[Kdf101]

Yeah, conservative judges.

 

[bmanguns]

Interesting ruling to be sure. I just don’t see California Dems stopping here. They’ll find sone way to try to unwind this... give it time.

 

[Goodcat]

Incredibly surprising, but so glad to hear. Hopefully the first of many.

 

[Ingomike]

One great thing about this ruling is they said "strict scrutiny" applied instead of "intermediate scrutiny".

 

[Ingomike]

Housekeeping message for Aaron, Please stop using the negative vernacular of the leftists trying to disarm the people. The law took away the standard magazines that come with the gun.

 

[Twangbanger]

Is it cynical for me to believe this just adds another case to the warehouse of ones which can potentially percolate to "the top" after Joe Biden has signed a new AW Ban into law...subsequently allowing John Roberts to pick sides with the liberals and find mag limits constitutional?

Until Ginsburg is declared deceased by a 10-member panel of UN Observers and carried out of the building - and another Trump Justice installed in her place during a second term - all these cases look to me like "smoldering coals" that are being tucked away, to be pulled out later and used to legalize federal gun control statutes.

But hey, that's just me.

 

[Hawkeye7br]

This is why a second Trump term is so important. Not his idiotic twitter rants, not his name calling, but judge appointments. I still believe that gun control will ultimately be decided in the courts, and we need conservative, non commie judges on these courts.

This, it's the long game that is important. If a basketball team is 8 & 16, nobody remembers the season. If a coach is 420 & 130, he's in the hall of fame.

 

[Lex Concord]

That would be surprising. Page 2 from the original link only lists three judges.

Agreed.

Combined with the following footnote taken from page 79 of the decision:

It is unnecessary to decide whether “Turner deference” is relevant to the question before this Court, because the outcome is the same regardless. But to the extent that the majority identifies any confusion about the applicability of Turner deference or the meaning of intermediate scrutiny in this Court’s precedents, I respectfully suggest that is reason for the Circuit to consider this case en banc.

 

[Amishman44]

This is why a second Trump term is so important. Not his idiotic twitter rants, not his name calling, but judge appointments. I still believe that gun control will ultimately be decided in the courts, and we need conservative, non commie judges on these courts.

Yes...and that's exactly what the Left is so incredibly afraid of, court decisions that favor Conservativism and Constitutionalism!
The last thing a leftist wants is having the Constitution both upheld and applied correctly, as their goal is to render it inept!

 

[Alamo]

 

[Phase2]

The NSSF has released a statement about shipping larger capacity mags to California:

We have been asked by California retailers, distributors and ammunition magazine manufacturers across the industry whether Friday’s landmark decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in Duncan v. Becerra means they can now sell to California consumers, ship to California retailers or manufacture in the state for commercial sale in the state ammunition magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition (so-called “Large Capacity Magazines” or LCM). The short answer is “NO.”

While the holding in Duncan is a tremendous victory for the Second Amendment, members of the industry should continue to refrain from selling or shipping into California LCMs until after the appeal proceeding is concluded or the stay is modified or lifted. This is because the U.S. District Court’s Order Staying In Part Judgment Pending Appeal, dated April 4, 2019, remains in effect “pending final resolution of the appeal from the Judgment.” The appellate proceedings have not concluded or been finally resolved, so the stay remains in place.

Stay tuned. NSSF will update you on developments, including when the appeal is over and you can sell standard-sized magazines in California.