Posted on 03/29/2019 5:08:35 PM PDT by TexasGurl24
California's statute to confiscate all magazines over 10 rounds has been permanently enjoined by the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. The opinion was written by Judge Roger T. Benitez.
Previously, Judge Benitez had issued a preliminary injunction against the confiscation law, and the preliminary injunction was upheld by the Ninth Circuit, as discussed in this post. Today's decision follows cross-motions for summary judgment, and makes the injunction permanent. The next step in Duncan v. Becerra will be an appeal to the Ninth Circuit by California Attorney General Xavier Becerra.
The 86-page opinion is the most thorough judicial analysis thus far of the magazine ban question. The opinion is founded on a careful analysis of the record, and thus provides an excellent basis for future appellate review on the merits, perhaps one day by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Covering all bases, the opinion analyzes the confiscation law under a variety of standards of review. First is the standard favored by Judge Benitez, what he calls "The Supreme Court's Simple Heller Test." In short, magazines over 10 rounds are plainly "in common use" "for lawful purposes like self-defense." Ergo, they may not be confiscated. The analysis is similar to then-Judge Kavanaugh's dissenting opinion in the 2011 Heller II case in the D.C. Circuit.
The Duncan opinion then examines the confiscation statute under various levels of "heightened scrutiny": categorical invalidation, strict scrutiny, and intermediate scrutiny. The confiscation statute is found unconstitutional under each of these standards.
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Duncan-2019-03-29-Order-Granting-Plaintiffs-MSJ.pdf
On to the 9th Circus.
So I can taker larger magazines to California?
So I can taker larger magazines to California?
= = =
Sure, just don’t get caught.
New mags over 10 rounds are still ‘bad’.
When they make us Felons, what life style do they expect us Felons to live?
Just read some excerpts from the opinion.
Judge slapped Bacerra down hard for using Mother Jones and random news articles as proof of the need for the ban, with no official statistics from any agency
Good Grief! Imagine how many perfectly legal guns would be made illegal and how many law-abiding citizens would become felons and suffer not only the monetary loss, but the self-defensive part of it all
Sanity in our Judiciary is rare. Savor the moment.
Of course you "can".
The police there may have a different opinion about whether you may do so legally.
Contesting the police opinion in court is likely to run to hundreds of thousands of dollars of legal fees.
They judge enjoined California Penal Code § 32310 in its entirety. I am sure the 9th Circuit will stay his decision any time now.
Too bad the anti-magazine / anti-gun morons know nothing about firearms and don’t realize you can change a mag in less than two seconds.
Yeah, a Playboy double volume...
This was not an Obama judge. Contrary to what Roberts says, there are political activists who are posing as Judges, and they almost always tend to be Obama Judges.
I’m surprised it hasn’t already.
He’s a G.W. Bush appointee.
>
Judge slapped Bacerra down hard for using Mother Jones and random news articles as proof of the need for the ban, with no official statistics from any agency
>
Sadly, it’s just more ‘splitting hairs’.
Judge would have gotten much kudos if he’d had just used the last 5 words in the 2nd to strike it down (and let SCOTUS pretzel logic the plain, simple English thereof).
Proper conclusion, wrong PATH to get there.
Sounds like the Ninth Circus already upheld the judge’s injunction, and kicked it back to him for further clarification, which he did here. Probably not the end of the story, of course, but it sounds good...?
What?
This thread is NOT about Hustler, Playboy, …?
If I understand correctly, the District Court (the lowest level federal court) granted a temporary injunction based on an assessment that the plaintiffs were likely to win and granting the injunction would prevent irreversible harm to the plaintiffs.
The state then appealed the issuance of the injunction to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (from which one would appeal to the Supreme Court) and the Ninth Circuit upheld the issuance of the temporary injunction.
Today, apparently, the lower District Court has now made its decision based on the merits of the case and has decided in favor of the plaintiffs and has issued a permanent injunction. The case is now ready to be heard on its merits by the Ninth Circuit if California chooses to appeal; which it most certainly will.
I haven't read the opinion yet, but it appears to be a very big win because it is based on the protections of the Second Amendment and not on some other issue.
Furthermore, another poster has suggested that the opinion strikes the entire "large capacity magazine" section of the law. If true, and if upheld by the higher courts, that would enable people to purchase such magazines in California. I, for one, expect to be in possession of hundreds of such magazines at such time as our Second Amendment is restored. I just wish the Ninth Circuit could address the multi-year delays that they are purposely imposing on gun owners in California. They are an absolute disgrace.
You are apparently unaware of the California bullet button. In the Democratic Peoples Republic of Kali, you cannot possess a rifle capable of releasing the magazine with finger pressure. You MUST use the point of a bullet, or other tool, to release the magazine. Otherwise, the rifle qualifies as assault weapons and are illegal to own.
Now, explain why the DPRK shouldn't be nuked, as a hostile foreign country.
Actually, that was last year. This year the requirement is that the gun must be disassembled in order to change the magazine.
Not according to this decision. . . all magazine capacities are legal again in California.
I was referring to a conventional pistol like a Sig226. As for ARs, I moved to Cali from NC last year and sold my AR in NC before I left since I would have become an instant felon in California.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.