Other State California's Mag Ban Ruled Unconstitutional

[Geardo]

There's some really good, up-to-the-"minute" info here on CalGuns.net. Sounds like it may be moving to the 9th Circus. Here is the stay of judgment, also signed by Judge Benitez. In layman's terms, all Californians who purchase large, standard-capacity magazines Mar. 29 through midnight, April 5 are immune from prosecution, but no more mags can be shipped to CA beginning April 6. They are also granted immunity from prosecution for mere possession of said magazines pending a lifting of the stay or appeal proceedings that favor Judge Benitez's decision to overturn the unconstitutional law.

You may need to click on the photo below in order to expand it in order to read it in its entirety.

This post is NOT legal advice!

View attachment 566185

Damnit. I spent $300 on mags I was going to ship in next week. Oh well 1 shipment made it in.

 

[tkdguy]

THAT IS CLEAR. IF THE 9TH OVERTURNS, WHICH MAY BE A PROBABILITY; THERE WILL BE HELL TO PAY AND THEN, ONTO THE SUPREME COURT. HOWEVER, IN LINE IS A NEW YORK CONTEST WHERE THE SUPREME COURT MAY BROADEN THEIR DECISION REGARDING THE DEBATE ABOUT THE NEW YORK CITY RESTRICTIONS REGARDING TRANSPORT OTHER THAN CITY APPROVED SHOOTING RANGES. THE 9TH GETS MORE FREQUENTLY OVER TURNED THAN MOST; BUT MAYBE THE 9TH WILL BE WISE THIS TIME AROUND.

THEIR CLAIM OF IRREPARABLE DAMAGE TO THE STATE AS A RESULT OF AN INFLUX OF HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES WOULD HAVE TO BE TESTED; HOWEVER THEIR GANGS ARE LIKELY BUYING MAGS ON THE BALK MARKET.

 

[Diamondback]

As I was just observing over at M4C:

They should totally do a California Commemorative limited-edition PMAG, assuming Benitez doesn't get stayed. It could be one hell of a fundraiser for CRPA/Calguns or SAF... and then do others every time another Ban gets overturned or repealed.

Then if we win at SCOTUS, maybe complete the set with a different PMAG for each state, territory etc...

If I were Magpul, I'd be offering each state's lead 2A group like Calguns, SAF, OFF etc an exclusive-deco PMAG as a fundraiser opportunity...

 

[oli700]

 

[slimmer13]

Manufacturers should have tractor/trailers full of mags drive all night to sell tomorrow like street tacos.

 

[GWS]

Just got this from Gun Owners of California

Stay just got issued
Dammit! Upshot is you can keep anything that arrives by 5PM PST
http://michellawyers.com/wp-content...r-Staying-in-Part-Judgment-Pending-Appeal.pdf

Get the word out to any friends in CA

 

[tkdguy]

Are you sure the product has to arrive by 5pm on 4/5/19 or has to be ordered by 5pm on that day?

 

[awshoot]

There is an interesting way to read the order posted at calguns. If we move some words around:

For persons or businesses who have manufactured, imported, sold, OR bought standard mags between 3/29/19 5:00 pm and 4/5/19 5:00 pm, CA is permanently forbidden from enforcing those parts of the law that prohibit making, importing, or transferring standard mags.

This would mean that anyone who did one of those four things in the specified timeframe, is protected from enforcement indefinitely. (laminate the receipt!)

Now I don't know if that's a good interpretation. Another way to read it is:

The injunction forbidding enforcement of the law shall remain in effect ... between Date 1 and Date 2.

A grammar expert would have to evaluate how the phrase represented by ellipses above affects the sentence. That phrase is: "for those persons and business entities who have manufactured, imported, sold, or bought magazines able to hold more than 10 rounds"

It could mean:

1. the date range further identifies the group of people identified in the order, and the injunction is permanent as to them (they can continue to import, buy, etc. until the injunction is overturned by a higher court).
2. the date range refers to when the injunction shall remain in effect and a person must do one of the four actions identified during that timeframe.

for reference, the actual language:

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the permanent injunction enjoining enforcement of California Penal Code § 32310 (a) and (b) shall remain in effect for those persons and business entities who have manufactured, imported, sold, or bought magazines able to hold more than 10 rounds between the entry of this Court's injunction on March 29, 2019 and 5:00 p.m., Friday, April 5, 2019.

 

[nammac]

Me thinks it's past time for this to go to the Supreme Court for decision...

Let's get this anti-gun bull manure settled once for all...

 

[Geardo]

Me thinks it's past time for this to go to the Supreme Court for decision...

Let's get this anti-gun bull manure settled once for all...

Seriously! I would love to stop having to stockpile magazines!

 

[Hawaiian]

Purchased or delivered by 04/05? That is the 64 thousand $ question everyone is debating. I have been following the party over on Cal Guns forum. For the past few days they have been like kids in a candy store ordering mags.

 

[tkdguy]

Would be great if the 9th does not reverse the So. Cal. Judge decision!

 

[GWS]

Are you sure the product has to arrive by 5pm on 4/5/19 or has to be ordered by 5pm on that day?

Per Gun Owners of California -- Must be DELIVERED BY 5PM Friday, April 5th

 

[papersoldier]

Well, no matter what the higher court opinion ends up being I hope our Californian Brothers and Sisters got their hands on a TON of mags that are now grandfathered !

 

[GWS]

By issuing his stay, Benitez was able to set the terms of it i.e Anything in your possession by 5PM Friday is legally yours.
If the 9th issued the stay, Who knows what they could have done.
Judge Benitez is a great judge and ally of of the Second Amendment

 

[nammac]

I'm confused, the Judge who wrote the dissent that said California couldn't limit magazine capacity, less than a week later issues a stay on his own work?

Seriously?

 

[Camelfilter]

I'm confused, the Judge who wrote the dissent that said California couldn't limit magazine capacity, less than a week later issues a stay on his own work?

Seriously?

Read the stay.

 

[GWS]

I'm confused, the Judge who wrote the dissent that said California couldn't limit magazine capacity, less than a week later issues a stay on his own work?

Seriously?

It was the SMART decision

 

[Defense Minister]

There is an interesting way to read the order posted at calguns. If we move some words around:

This would mean that anyone who did one of those four things in the specified timeframe, is protected from enforcement indefinitely. (laminate the receipt!)

Now I don't know if that's a good interpretation. Another way to read it is:

A grammar expert would have to evaluate how the phrase represented by ellipses above affects the sentence. That phrase is: "for those persons and business entities who have manufactured, imported, sold, or bought magazines able to hold more than 10 rounds"

It could mean:

1. the date range further identifies the group of people identified in the order, and the injunction is permanent as to them (they can continue to import, buy, etc. until the injunction is overturned by a higher court).
2. the date range refers to when the injunction shall remain in effect and a person must do one of the four actions identified during that timeframe.

for reference, the actual language:

If this doesn't get settled by SCOTUS, it will end up meaning what the CA DA wants it to mean...

I'm confused, the Judge who wrote the dissent that said California couldn't limit magazine capacity, less than a week later issues a stay on his own work?

Seriously?

I believe he is trying to get it to SCOTUS which won't happen if CA surrenders to his Mar. 29 decision.

 

[awshoot]

I'm confused, the Judge who wrote the dissent that said California couldn't limit magazine capacity, less than a week later issues a stay on his own work?

Seriously?

Everyone knows that if Benitez does not issue a stay, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will. It is better to have a friendly judge write the stay in a way that protects recent purchasers, than to have an unfriendly judge write the stay in a manner that bubblegums them.