CA Mag Ban Appeal - Oral Argument Live Stream (5/14, 9:00am)

[awshoot]

Duncan v. Becerra is to be argued this morning (5/14/18) at 9 am in the 9th Circuit. This is a link to the live stream: Watch recording for San Francisco CR3 9:00 AM Monday 5/14, No.

A fairly recent initiative in CA banned standard capacity magazines and different lower courts in CA issued conflicting rulings on the ban last summer in the context of a request for a preliminary injunction to stop the law from going into effect before the litigation regarding constitutionality of the law could be completed: Judges Issue Conflicting Rulings on Calif. Gun Law

All of the briefing for Duncan (both trial and appellate) is available here: http://michellawyers.com/duncan-v-becerra/

Read More

 

[awshoot]

The first 2/3 of the argument focused mostly on procedural issues -- this was an appeal by CA from a preliminary injunction stopping the law from going into effect (it would have required dispossession of lawfully acquired magazines or permanent alteration of them) -- so the focus was on whether the trial judge abused his discretion when he imposed the injunction. Much of that is pretty dry.

The last third focused on the 5th Amendment takings issue and was quite a bit more lively. Duncan's lawyer (pro 2A side) made very good arguments about how letting the law go into effect before a trial on the merits was had, would effectively dispossess people of their property before we even know if the law passes constitutional muster, and by then it would be too late to fix the dispossession.

I think this last part is pretty important because a lot of the recent gun control initiatives and legislation are not including grandfather clauses and also not making provision for payment, so this oversight could be a basis for their undoing.

EDIT: Argument -- it gets most interesting at 31:45:

 

[awshoot]

During the argument here, it was mentioned that a motion for summary judgment argument recently occurred at the lower court. I found this article regarding that argument: California Gun Magazine Ban Faces Tough Questions From Judge

of note, maybe negative:

Benitez interrupted both sides throughout the court hearing to ask for statistics on gun violence and the involvement of high-capacity magazines in such incidents, but neither Barvir nor John Echeverria with Attorney General Xavier Becerra's office could provide the answers the judge sought.

"When does the court have the ability to say enough is enough?" Benitez said.

"How do we make the decision of how far we allow the state to interfere in what is arguably protected by the Second Amendment?" he added. "None of us would want one of our neighbors to own a bazooka or hand grenade but if you read the Second Amendment that would probably be okay."

and maybe positive:

The judge also challenged the piecemeal approach the government has taken in addressing public safety concerns regarding guns. He questioned the "incremental way we're addressing the Second Amendment," hypothesizing the government could use the same arguments to enact a ban on lower capacity magazines in the future.

"Why should the government be so arrogant as to tell law-abiding citizens: 'You know what? Too bad, so sad. If you had 17 rounds you would have been able to stop that assailant and now you're raped and now you're dead,'" Benitez said.

 

[ItsLunchBOX]

thanks for the highlights.

 

[Slobray]

Well it looks like they have a temporary reprieve, as a 3 judge panel for the 9th Circus upheld a federal district count injunction against the magazine confiscation. Ninth Circuit upholds preliminary injunction against magazine confiscation in California

We all know it's only temporary, because of the partisan activists of 9th Circus' habit of using the enbanc process to overturn decisions they don't like.



Ray

 

[P7M13]

Legal Porn !