B.L.U.F. The Ninth Circus court issues a stay pending appeal in the California magazine ban.

(1200 words)

I have written reams of electronic paper talking about how the court system “works”. At the top is the Supreme Court. The first level of Article III inferior courts is the Circuit Court of Appeals. The next level down is the Federal District Courts.

I have written about case law. Case law is set by superior courts. The Supreme Court sets the case law. The Circuit Courts then interpret that case law, setting case law for their circuit in turn. The District Courts then apply the law as interpreted by the Circuit Court case law.

If there is no case law within a circuit, then case law established by other circuits can be cited. You can cite to other circuits. If there is a consensus among the other circuits, that is a good place for to start.

Today, the Ninth Circus Court of Appeals issued a stay in —Order: Virginia Duncan v. Rob Bonta, No. 23-55805 (9th Cir.). They decided, over the vigorous dissent of four judges, that they were not going to actually do their jobs, again.
Read More

B.L.U.F.
This is the frames and receivers rule.
(650 words)

On October 5th, 2023, the DoJ applied on the Supreme Court’s emergency docket for the court to vacate the injunction issued by the N.D. Texas.

As we have discussed for the circuit courts, the Supreme Court has an “administrative panel”. Each circuit court has a Justice charged with overseeing that circuit. Overseeing is a massive overstatement.

When a case is appealed out of the circuit to the Supreme Court, it can come as a merits-based request for certiorari, or it can come as an emergency request. If it is an emergency request, it goes to the Justice that oversees that circuit. In this case, it is Justice Alito.

The state requested that the injunction issued in the N.D. Texas be vacated pending appeal. This is different language than I am used to seeing. Normally, the request is for a “stay pending appeal”. My understanding is that vacating a finding is to throw it out.

Justice Alito issued a temporary stay for 10 days to allow the parties to file briefs. You can expect the usual suspects to dog pile as well.

What Was Said

Read More

B.L.U.F.Short discussion of the level of honesty from the state.

I’m under the weather, so nothing too long, I hope. (I can hope, it just doesn’t happen.)

(2200 words)

Duncan v. Bonta is the case that started in 2017 challenging California’s magazine ban. Judge Benitez found magazine bans to be unconstitutional. He enjoined the state from enforcing the magazine ban. Thousands of magazines flowed into the state.

The state begged for a stay while the case was on appeal. Judge Benitez granted that stay in part. Those people who possessed forbidden magazines were protected as well as those that received magazines during the injunction, as well as the people who ordered during Freedom Week but had not yet received their magazines.

Since there was no emergency motion for a stay, the case was assigned to a three judge panel. The three judge panel agreed with Judge Benitez. The opinion of the three judge panel was written by Circuit Judge Lee.

The state asked for an en banc hearing. As expected, it was granted. The en banc panel then found in a 7 to 4 opinion that a magazine ban was constitutional and vacated the three judge panel’s opinion. Judge Vandyke wrote a fantastic dissent on the case, slamming the majority.

The plaintiffs (good guys) appealed to the Supreme Court. The request for certiorari was not granted, nor was it denied. The case was held pending the outcome of Bruen. After Bruen was decided, the Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated the en banc panel’s opinion, and remanded the case back to the Ninth Circuit.
Read More

On September 26, 2023, Governor Newsom signed a bunch of infringing laws into effect.

The Bad News

The bills were:

SB 2

Restricting who gets CCWs. The minimum age to get a CCW of 21. More training and making most of California a “sensitive place”.

SB 452

Require microstamping on all guns sold or transferred by 2028.

AB 28

11% excise tax on firearms and ammunition

AB 455

Prohibit people in “mental health diversion programs” from possessing firearms

AB 725

Requires reporting when chunks of aluminum or plastic or lost or stolen as if they were firearms.

AB 732

Makes it easier for the state to remove firearms from people

• AB 28 by Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel (D-Encino) – Firearms and ammunition: excise tax.
• AB 92 by Assemblymember Damon Connolly (D-San Rafael) – Body armor: prohibition.
• AB 97 by Assemblymember Freddie Rodriguez (D-Pomona) – Firearms: unserialized firearms.
• AB 301 by Rebecca Bauer-Kahan (D-Orinda) – Gun violence restraining orders: body armor.
• AB 355 by Assemblymember Juan Alanis (R-Modesto) – Firearms: assault weapons: exception for peace officer training.
• AB 455 by Assemblymember Sharon Quirk-Silva (D-Fullerton) – Firearms: prohibited persons.
• AB 574 by Assemblymember Reginald Byron Jones-Sawyer, Sr. (D-Los Angeles) – Firearms: dealer records of sale.
• AB 724 by Assemblymember Vince Fong (R-Bakersfield) – Firearms: safety certificate instructional materials.
• AB 725 by Assemblymember Josh Lowenthal (D-Long Beach) – Firearms: reporting of lost and stolen firearms.
• AB 732 by Assemblymember Mike Fong (D-Alhambra) – Crimes: relinquishment of firearms.
• AB 762 by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland) – California Violence Intervention and Prevention Grant Program.
• AB 818 by Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris (D-Irvine) – Protective orders.
• AB 1089 by Assemblymember Mike Gipson (D-Carson) – Firearms.
• AB 1406 by Assemblymember Kevin McCarty (D-Sacramento) – Firearms: waiting periods.
• AB 1420 by Assemblymember Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) – Firearms.
• AB 1483 by Assemblymember Avelino Valencia (D-Anaheim) – Firearms: purchases.
• AB 1587 by Assemblymember Philip Ting (D-San Francisco) – Financial transactions: firearms merchants: merchant category code.
• AB 1598 by Assemblymember Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) – Gun violence: firearm safety education.
• SB 2 by Senator Anthony Portantino (D-Burbank) – Firearms.
• SB 241 by Senator Dave Min (D-Irvine) – Firearms: dealer requirements.
• SB 368 by Senator Anthony Portantino (D-Burbank) – Firearms: requirements for licensed dealers.
• SB 417 by Senator Catherine Blakespear (D-Encinitas) – Firearms: licensed dealers.
• SB 452 by Senator Catherine Blakespear (D-Encinitas) – Firearms.

The Good News

The Great News

This little form says that Judge Carney grabbed this case. He likely grabbed any others filed in C.D.Cal.

Why is great news?

This is the same judge who recently found for the plaintiffs (good guys) in Lance Boland v. Robert Bonta, 8:22-cv-01421, (C.D. Cal.). He followed Bruen and got it mostly right. This means that he can move rapidly and will likely issue a TRO and preliminary injunction shortly.

This is a case worth watching. Not to see what happens, but to see how rapidly it happens.

(Words 1200)

Just what the title says, a number of cases with either short histories or simply where the are in the process.

National Rifle Association v. Commissioner, Florida Dept. of Law Enforcement, 21-12314, (11th Cir.)

Suit filed in March 2018, Eleventh Circuit court 2 judge panel hears oral arguments heard March 24, 2022. On March 9, 2023, the panel decides that 18,19, and 20-year-olds are not Part of the People. The opinion was vacated the same day. On July 14, 2023, the Circuit Court decided to hear the case en banc

Currently waiting for scheduling orders.

United States v. Rahimi, 21-11001, (5th Cir.)

Cert granted by the Supreme Court. Oral arguments to be heard in the term starting October 2023.

United States v. Connelly, 23-50312, (5th Cir.)

A criminal case was opened in Jan. 2022. The Connelly’s were charged with a violation of §922(g)(3). The trial judge (criminal trial) found for Connelly. The state appealed to the fifth circuit on May 4, 2023. Briefings not yet submitted. Oral arguments not yet scheduled.

Ocean State Tactical, LLC v. State of Rhode Island, 23-1072, (1st Cir.)

Case opened June 23, 2022. Magazine ban law. The District court found that magazines are not arms on December 14, 2022. Appealed on January 13, 2023. Oral arguments were heard on September 11, 2023.

Waiting for the three judge panel’s opinion.
Read More

B.L.U.F.
The Ninth Circuit has a history of ruling against The People in Second Amendment cases. I heard that they are 0 for 50. Not verified.

This is the story of just one 2A case. It is very long. About 4 hours of writing and research. Even if you don’t want to read my description of the history of this case, please take the time to read the dissents. (link updated to work.)

(3900 words)

In May 2017, a hero steps forth to do battle with the great leviathan which is the California anti-gun state.

Virginia Duncan files a lawsuit challenging California’s magazine ban. Since 2008, when the Heller Court stated that the Second Amendment protected an individual, the rogue courts had been rubber-stamping every gun control regulation the states could dream up.

She was just another Don Quixote, tilting at windmills, hoping to accomplish something. There was little or no chance of winning. Even the most inferior courts, the district courts, would be against her.

A judge was pulled at random and assigned to her case. Judge Roger T. Benitez was his name. Luckily for Virginia, he was a rogue judge.

A rogue judge or court is a court that mouths the words of their superiors, yet finds ways to disobey even the clearest of instructions.

Judge Benitez was just such a man. In the plaintiff’s motion to dismiss, they state it bluntly, California’s magazine ban is unconstitutional.

It is important to note that they are using the most powerful case law available to them, Heller. In particular, they make the claim that “in common use” means that it can’t be banned. If the item is an arm that is in common use today, then it is protected under the Second Amendment.
Read More

B.L.U.F.
A gag inducing opinion from a rogue court.
(2900 words)

Who is Dimke

Dimke graduated from Pepperdine University in 1999 before entering Vanderbilt University School of Law, where she graduated with a J.D. in 2002. From there she went to clerk for Alan B. Johnson, a Reagan appointee. Likely because he did his undergraduate work at Vanderbilt. From there, she moved on to clerk for Richard C. Tallman on the Ninth Circuit.

Tallman is a Bill Clinton appointee. His professional career starts in the government. He was a DoJ lawyer and then Assistant United States Attorney in Seattle. From there, he went into private practice, focusing on white-collar criminal defense.

According to Wikipedia, his notable opinion was:

After clerking for Tallman, Dimke became a DoJ Trial Attorney, then an Assistant U.S. Attorney. From 2012 through 2016 she was the Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Washington.

In 2021, Biden nominated her as a Judge for the Eastern District of Washington.

This is a person who has spent her entire career working for the government. As a government lawyer, she gets to choose what cases she prosecutes. If she doesn’t think she can win in court, she can plead the charges down or get some other “win” without having to go to trial.

Her job for all those years was to get wins for the state.

Steps To a Win

Read More