Posted on 07/24/2018 10:15:43 AM PDT by rktman
The Supreme Court of the United States, and the highest courts of most states, do not sit in panels but hear all of their cases en banc (with the exception of cases where a judge is ill or recused).
Cases in United States courts of appeals are heard by a three-judge panel. A majority of the active circuit judges may decide to hear or rehear a case en banc. Parties may suggest an en banc hearing to the judges but have no right to it. The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure state that en banc proceedings are disfavored but may be ordered to maintain uniformity of decisions within the circuit or if the issue is exceptionally important (Fed. R. App. P. 35(a)). Each court of appeals also has particular rules regarding en banc proceedings. Under the doctrine of stare decisis, as applied in the federal court system, only a court sitting en banc or the U.S. Supreme Court can overrule a prior decision in the same circuit; in other words, one panel cannot overrule another.
Federal law provides that for courts with more than 15 judges, an en banc hearing may consist of “such number of members of its en banc courts as may be prescribed by rule of the court of appeals.”[4] The Ninth Circuit, with 29 judges, uses this procedure, and its en banc court consists of 11 judges. Theoretically, the Ninth Circuit can hear the case with all judges participating. In practice, however, such a hearing has only been requested rarely; the requests have all been denied.[5][6][7] The Fifth Circuit, with 17 judges, also adopted a similar procedure in 1986. State of La. ex rel. Guste v. M/V TESTBANK, 752 F.2d 1019 (5th Cir. 1985) (en banc). The Sixth Circuit has 16 judges[8] but as of September 2016[9] it has not yet adopted such a policy; en banc cases are generally heard by all 16 judges. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, established in 1978, sat en banc for the first time in 2017 in a case concerning bulk data collection.[10]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/En_banc
“If I’m correct and if that happens we can be sure that the 9th Circus will rule against the 2nd Amendment. “
Unless Don has made some appointments there already.
President Trump is scaring the hell out of them for some reason.
The battleship that the 9th circuit is, is already beginning to turn around.
Anytime around me!
This was a three judge panel. It can be appealed to the whole boatload of Ninth judges sitting together. I can’t imagine that whole gang ruling anything remotely for the 2Amd.
Did I wake up in an alternate universe?
There no impeachment to be afraid of. The number of federal judges impeached and convicted in our entire history can be counted on one hand.
Florida’s distinguished Congressman, L.C. Hastings did not let his removal from the federal bench slow him down or reduce his appeal to the dimwits.
This is the second pro-Second-Amendment ruling from the 9th.
Something very weird is going on, but I like it.
Son of a gun. I just looked it up, and there it is, right there, in print.
The amendment did not prevent states from regulating firearm possession, it was intended to prevent the federal government from interfering.
All states refuse felons the right to own a gun. Nor can they be prevented from disallowing the mentally ill to purchase firearms.
It does not mean anything goes.
LOL!!!!!!!!
Looks unwieldy.
What is unusual about a flying pig??
“The amendment did not prevent states from regulating firearm possession”
It does now.
Surprising, yes, but this was a ruling by a three judge panel, not the full (en banc) court.
Not sure where it goes from here, or whether the state of Hawaii will appeal the ruling.
Just in case you missed the fifteen other answers to your query, it means the entire 9 circus will hear the case instead of just three judges.
No it does not. The only change has been the feds getting involved.
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.