It's a very good step in a very long walk.
It's a very good step in a very long walk.
We could isolate Russia totally from the world and maybe they could apply for membership after 2000 years.
This is a wonderful opinion, essentially a kick squarely to the balls of those who hate AR15s and the 2nd Amendment.
As to the stay, my guess is that Judge Benitez thinks that the 9th is likely to stay enforcement of his decision pending its own ruling. Staying enforcement of his decision preserves the status quo until the 9th has time to take whatever action it decides to take with regard to a stay. Ruling various criminal statutes as unconstitutional is a big deal. In the long run, it makes little sense to have behavior decriminalized for only 30 days or less, just to have enforcement of Benitez's ruling stayed by a higher court within that time frame.
"Rich," the Old Man said dreamily, "is a little whiskey to drink and some food to eat and a roof over your head and a fish pole and a boat and a gun and a dollar for a box of shells." Robert Ruark
We literally just finished en banc briefing in Duncan (the mag case that created "freedom week"), and we're working on briefing the first carry case SCOTUS has ever taken, so I'm not sure what he's talking about. FPC is faced with the same problem as us in the Ninth. It's easy to get a win in the district court, but the Ninth en banc remains nearly impossible to get a win. SCOTUS is also very unlikely to take these cases without a circuit split or the government appealing from an en banc decision.Originally Posted by JohnO
We had to create the circuit split on carry before getting SCOTUS to review, which is part of the reason it took 10 years from McDonald.
Stays are generally issued when requested by the government in cases where the order prevents application of a statute. This stay will give the government enough time to get a stay pending the appeal, so the order will likely never go into effect until the appeals process is completed.
I realized after I posted above that the mailorder ammo and magazine ban cases where Benitez didn't put a stay on his own decision were a little different than the AWB case. If someone mailordered ammo and then the 9th put a stay on the decision, possession of that ammo would still be legal. Same thing with >10 round magazines, since the law in question only criminalized purchase and transfer of those magazines, not possession. But if Benitez didn't put a stay on his AWB decision and someone immediately went out and modified their firearm so that it was now a California assault weapon, then as soon as the state got the 9th Circuit to put a stay on the ruling (which is much more likely than not), then that firearm would immediately be illegal, since it's not a registered assault weapon. If by chance the plaintiffs beat the odds and the 9th Circuit doesn't put their own stay on the case, then Benitez's stay will expire fairly quickly.
Hurray! And mad props to the FPC for their hard work.
And where the fuck was the NRA? Trying on new suits I suppose.
Cat
@joshs provided an update upthread on ongoing NRA legal action. (Post #53). I'll agree that WLP is a cancerous blight on the NRA, but there's still good people from that org who are in the trenches.
Last edited by Mark D; 06-05-2021 at 11:35 PM.
Very much this.
Loppy needs to go overboard ASAP but the organization itself still has immense value.
Okie John
“The reliability of the 30-06 on most of the world’s non-dangerous game is so well established as to be beyond intelligent dispute.” Finn Aagaard
"Don't fuck with it" seems to prevent the vast majority of reported issues." BehindBlueI's
Agreed. We really need a firebrand NRA. WLaP & his cronies need to go. To prison, preferably.
Reply With Quote