Duncan v. Bonta Round 2 is OUT!

[ilikegunspdx]

This works pretty awesome to transcribe audio fyi:

 

[Ura-Ki]

I wouldn't know because...I'm deaf, and so, can't quite read lips through a phone screen either. All I could see is how he seems more proficient with handguns than most Judges but that's about it.

I'm not much help here for ya, but a quick and dirty brake down of the Good Judge goes something like this:
9th circuit don't know jack sh!t from its own arse, so, he proceeds to break it down for us explaining why and how, and then goes into actual mechanical functions and how it doesn't jive with the courts ruling, and explains how we got here and all that! Basically, he called the court a bunch of Cucks of the state and is not happy about it at all!

Honestly, for his first time out, and putting himself on the U-Tubeaverse for all to criticize, I would say he did something pretty dang amazing, and set a presentident going forward, this judge don't suffer fools and don't play dat game, so y'all better watch out!

I kinda suspect this ain't the last we have heard from him, it may inspire other judges/justices to step forward publicly, and call out political hacks and activists judges that should be removed!

Something tells me Saint Benitias might be thinking the same thing, we might could see some things from him soon!

 

[Jcon268]

It is asinine, yes. It might explain why SCOTUS has continually relisted the Ocean State Tactical v Rhode Island cases (mag ban) instead of just rolling up sleeves and get to working on it,..... They (Alito and Thomas) aren't sure they can get even a 5-4 decision to overturn mag bans. Again like I said, if there's "no controversy", no "circuit split", the three leftist Justices might only need to get Roberts and one other Justice to go along and say "States can ban mags". We've seen Barrett express some things about letting States decide things unless it really infringes on Federal matters

The one thing I always hope for is that it personally affects them. Basically saying, what if these judges own "large cap" magazines that are standard to the firearm they belong to? Completely flies in the face of what it means to be a judge but if a judge can be an activist on one side (clearly, many are) then a judge can also be victimized by his colleagues decisions. This country is skidding downhill quick. This is why, IMO, Trump is being so ruthless. He sees all the special interests and activism that have entrenched various levels of government and how it is costing everyday people. Whether or not you like Trump or agree with him overall, it's possible you align with him on at least this one thing.

 

[Mono1]

Interest balancing in a matter of law. Prohibited by Bruen.

Precisely!

 

[nehalemguy]

Tell me if my memory is correct here.....

1. California passes magazine ban.
2. Judge Benitez rules ban unconstitutional.
3. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturns Judge Benitez's ruling.
4. 9ths ruling appealed to SCOTUS.
5. SCOTUS sends it back to the lower courts with a "Try again." note attached.
6. Judge Benitez again rules ban unconstitutional.
7. 9th Court of Appeals again overturns Judge Benitez's ruling.
8.
9.

Do I have this correct?

 

[Unka-Boo]

Tell me if my memory is correct here.....

1. California passes magazine ban.
2. Judge Benitez rules ban unconstitutional.
3. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturns Judge Benitez's ruling.
4. 9ths ruling appealed to SCOTUS.
5. SCOTUS sends it back to the lower courts with a "Try again." note attached.
6. Judge Benitez again rules ban unconstitutional.
7. 9th Court of Appeals again overturns Judge Benitez's ruling.
8.
9.

Do I have this correct?

Looks right from my reccolection...

 

[CamoDeafie]

Tell me if my memory is correct here.....

1. California passes magazine ban.
2. Judge Benitez rules ban unconstitutional.
3. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturns Judge Benitez's ruling.
4. 9ths ruling appealed to SCOTUS.
5. SCOTUS sends it back to the lower courts with a "Try again." note attached.
6. Judge Benitez again rules ban unconstitutional.
7. 9th Court of Appeals again overturns Judge Benitez's ruling.
8.
9.

Do I have this correct?

Basically

 

[Jcon268]

Tell me if my memory is correct here.....

1. California passes magazine ban.
2. Judge Benitez rules ban unconstitutional.
3. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturns Judge Benitez's ruling.
4. 9ths ruling appealed to SCOTUS.
5. SCOTUS sends it back to the lower courts with a "Try again." note attached.
6. Judge Benitez again rules ban unconstitutional.
7. 9th Court of Appeals again overturns Judge Benitez's ruling.
8.
9.

Do I have this correct?

What is the essence of "try again?" Make modifications, carveouts, etc?

 

[ilikegunspdx]

What is the essence of "try again?" Make modifications, carveouts, etc?

Redue with Bruen ruling in mind.

 

[USMC1911]

Tell me if my memory is correct here.....

1. California passes magazine ban.
2. Judge Benitez rules ban unconstitutional.
3. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturns Judge Benitez's ruling.
4. 9ths ruling appealed to SCOTUS.
5. SCOTUS sends it back to the lower courts with a "Try again." note attached.
6. Judge Benitez again rules ban unconstitutional.
7. 9th Court of Appeals again overturns Judge Benitez's ruling.
8.
9.

Do I have this correct?

It might take some time but I have a strong feeling the Supreme Court is going to smack down the 9th Circus. Ignoring the very reason the case was remanded back certainly won't sit well and deserves a good reminder who ultimately makes the decisions.

 

[CamoDeafie]

It might take some time but I have a strong feeling the Supreme Court is going to smack down the 9th Circus. Ignoring the very reason the case was remanded back certainly won't sit well and deserves a good reminder who ultimately makes the decisions.

The 9th Circus need more than just smacking down. A lot of the Judges there need to be removed for violating 18 USC Sections 241 and 242, IMO. Along with all the anti2A politicians in the whole District

 

[Jcon268]

The 9th Circus need more than just smacking down. A lot of the Judges there need to be removed for violating 18 USC Sections 241 and 242, IMO. Along with all the anti2A politicians in the whole District

Yep especially when they're cooperative with activist groups funded by billionaires like Bloomberg. Lobbying the judicial branch is influencing the outcomes of these rulings.

 

[Ura-Ki]

What really pisses me off, besides how long this case has been bounced through the system, that SCOTUS sent it back down via GVR with instructions, the 9th instead of doing it over sent it back down to Benitias, knowing full well it would take another year or more before he decided and wrote his opinion, then decided to play games again and take it back and then shoot it down anyway, not only thumbing their noses at SCOTUS, but making Benitias work extra hard for nothing, on our tax dollars! Seems to me, SCOTUS should step in NOW and issue it's reversal with prejudice, smack the 9th around a bunch ( yet again) and make this go away!

The 9th basically ignoring SCOTUS instructions to apply the Bruen test, basically saying that Mags are not a necessary part of a gun and have no effect on its function needs to bite them hard on the arse: if magazines are NOT necessary for function or are an integral part of a firearm to function, then they cannot be regulated at all, if it's not a gun, then it doesn't even reach the level of concern in these issues and should be dropped entirely, further more, under Bruen, if you cannot implicate something within the framework laid out under that ruling, then it's moot, unassailable!

Wouldn't that be something, using the nutty 9ths ruling against them, completely using their own language against them!

 

[Librarian]

Tell me if my memory is correct here.....

1. California passes magazine ban.
2. Judge Benitez rules ban unconstitutional.
3. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturns Judge Benitez's ruling.
4. 9ths ruling appealed to SCOTUS.
5. SCOTUS sends it back to the lower courts with a "Try again." note attached.
6. Judge Benitez again rules ban unconstitutional.
7. 9th Court of Appeals again overturns Judge Benitez's ruling.
8.
9.

Do I have this correct?

Skipped a step -
2A - CA appeals to 9th Circuit 3-judge panel, panel affirms Benitez, Aug 2020
3 9th Circuit en banc overturns panel Nov 2021

See also https://michellawyers.com/duncan-v-becerra/

 

[fmvolume86]

It is asinine, yes. It might explain why SCOTUS has continually relisted the Ocean State Tactical v Rhode Island cases (mag ban) instead of just rolling up sleeves and get to working on it,..... They (Alito and Thomas) aren't sure they can get even a 5-4 decision to overturn mag bans. Again like I said, if there's "no controversy", no "circuit split", the three leftist Justices might only need to get Roberts and one other Justice to go along and say "States can ban mags". We've seen Barrett express some things about letting States decide things unless it really infringes on Federal matters

Except it does infringe on the entire 2nd Ammendment which is a federal issue and governs the States. It's the 2nd Ammendment , that isn't a state right..... ARMS dont' fall under 10th ammendment. Do people even learn or read the Constitution..... we know Democrats dont

 

[CamoDeafie]

Except it does infringe on the entire 2nd Ammendment which is a federal issue and governs the States. It's the 2nd Ammendment , that isn't a state right..... ARMS dont' fall under 10th ammendment. Do people even learn or read the Constitution..... we know Democrats dont

And.... Tell me... Why do you think SCOTUS have consistently upheld NFA/GCA since Miller, why SCOTUS so far haven't taken up the Ocean State Tactical case, or the MD AWB case... And why they haven't gotten involved with the Illinois FOID case...?


Edit. Also.. there's this theory

The Right of State Governments to Defy the Supreme Court

The U.S. Supreme Court decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol bubblegum’n v. Bruen interferes with the states’ right to create new constitutional limits to enforce sensible gun control regulations.

www.scu.edu

That basically says 2A was never "incorporated" by the 14th Amendment and thus SCOTUS has been totally wrong on that since McDonald v Chicago, and States "should just ignore/defy SCOTUS 's "illegal" decisions"

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

And.... Tell me... Why do you think SCOTUS have consistently upheld NFA/GCA since Miller, why SCOTUS so far haven't taken up the Ocean State Tactical case, or the MD AWB case... And why they haven't gotten involved with the Illinois FOID case...?

Is it because those cases are only about 2a and don't have any benefits for corporations or rich people?

 

[Ura-Ki]

What really chaps my hide, states trying ( and being allowed) to use preemption to side step the B.o.R. in legislating, or putting it on a ballot, the authority to abridge our constitutional rights!!!

No state can ( Or should be allowed to) to claim preemption or otherwise sidestep constitutional rights, that isn't even allowed to Congress, and while we have seen them make laws against the 2nd through our our nations existence, it abridges the process that exists for doing exactly that, so the whole thing needs to be shut down and all anti 2nd laws repealed, if states want to make changes, we have a process for that, if Congress wishes to make changes, we have the same process available!

The bottom line here, the anti gun folks have been getting away with all of this because of either a weak SCOTUS or We the People have not held Feet to Fire enough to cause serious Burns, something that we really need to do, this bullbubblegum!t of having to wait for SCOTUS to eventually get around to it, whilst not taking up anywhere near enough cases per year, shows just how bent to the will of the antis we have become! We need to force the gooberment to hold the 2nd to the same levels of protections as all the other rights, and deny them 10 or 14 protections, or workarounds against the rest, including the 2nd, it's time the 2nd got the same protections as the others, and not treated as a second class right, subject to changes sor modifications via Congress or the Phuckin States!

 

[fmvolume86]

What really chaps my hide, states trying ( and being allowed) to use preemption to side step the B.o.R. in legislating, or putting it on a ballot, the authority to abridge our constitutional rights!!!

No state can ( Or should be allowed to) to claim preemption or otherwise sidestep constitutional rights, that isn't even allowed to Congress, and while we have seen them make laws against the 2nd through our our nations existence, it abridges the process that exists for doing exactly that, so the whole thing needs to be shut down and all anti 2nd laws repealed, if states want to make changes, we have a process for that, if Congress wishes to make changes, we have the same process available!

The bottom line here, the anti gun folks have been getting away with all of this because of either a weak SCOTUS or We the People have not held Feet to Fire enough to cause serious Burns, something that we really need to do, this bullbubblegum!t of having to wait for SCOTUS to eventually get around to it, whilst not taking up anywhere near enough cases per year, shows just how bent to the will of the antis we have become! We need to force the gooberment to hold the 2nd to the same levels of protections as all the other rights, and deny them 10 or 14 protections, or workarounds against the rest, including the 2nd, it's time the 2nd got the same protections as the others, and not treated as a second class right, subject to changes sor modifications via Congress or the Phuckin States!

as long as WE THE PEOPLE comply, why wouldn't they continue doing it............. here come the "easy for you to say" weak beta boys

 

[Ura-Ki]

as long as WE THE PEOPLE comply, why wouldn't they continue doing it............. here come the "easy for you to say" weak beta boys

That's the whole gist here, we have been compliant, and we have allowed infringements to the point where we will be loosing what left of our 2nd, so, we have two choices now, we organize and fight back, or we sit on our thumbs and await the SCOTUS pleasure! We all know what the answer here is, it's the same thing that got us here in the first place, we won't do anything because we haven't suffered enough personally, so, it's business as usual, until it ain't, then what?