What impact does the CA magazine decision have on MD limits?

roadking · Apr 3, 2019

With the recent ruling in CA striking down limits on magazine capacities, what ramifications does this have for MD? I don’t mean immediately, but is it likely that the Md restriction to allow sales to only 10 round magazines (max) will be challenged and/or possibly struck down?

I realize we aren’t lawyers or judges here. This is just a question for discussion. Any constructive thoughts are welcomed!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Allen65 · Apr 3, 2019

roadking said:
With the recent ruling in CA striking down limits on magazine capacities, what ramifications does this have for MD? I don’t mean immediately, but is it likely that the Md restriction to allow sales to only 10 round magazines (max) will be challenged and/or possibly struck down?

If upheld at 9CA, there would be a clear split with 4Ca (where we are), providing an opportunity for SCOTUS to take on the issue (CA will almost certainly apply for cert if 9CA upholds Duncan v Becerra) and overturn 4CA's Kolbe decision along with other equivalent state bans.

dblas · Apr 4, 2019

roadking said:
With the recent ruling in CA striking down limits on magazine capacities, what ramifications does this have for MD? I don’t mean immediately, but is it likely that the Md restriction to allow sales to only 10 round magazines (max) will be challenged and/or possibly struck down?

I realize we aren’t lawyers or judges here. This is just a question for discussion. Any constructive thoughts are welcomed!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maryland's 10 round restriction was already challenged and the 4th Circuit upheld the law.

rockstarr · Apr 4, 2019

dblas said:
Maryland's 10 round restriction was already challenged and the 4th Circuit upheld the law.

this still makes me upset and raise my nose at it

fabsroman · Apr 4, 2019

That is a really good question and most of it has already been covered here.

I will add this for discussion. Is there a difference between the California statute and the Maryland statute, like possession? IF the US Circuit Court for the 9th Circuit upholds the decision of the US District Court for the Southern District of California, and If SCOTUS takes this up, hopefully it would take up possession, transfer, sale, purchase, etc., and not merely possession. Guess I could continue to live with what we have here in Maryland as long as Maryland could NEVER ban the possession of a mag based upon its capacity. Who knows, maybe if the entire capacity issue is resolved as far as possession is concerned, then we could possibly attack the Maryland statute under the Commerce Clause, maybe.

Edited to changed 9th District to 9th Circuit

Augie · Apr 4, 2019

fabsroman said:
That is a really good question and most of it has already been covered here.

I will add this for discussion. Is there a difference between the California statute and the Maryland statute, like possession? IF the US Circuit Court for the 9th District upholds the decision of the US District Court for the Southern District of California, and If SCOTUS takes this up, hopefully it would take up possession, transfer, sale, purchase, etc., and not merely possession. Guess I could continue to live with what we have here in Maryland as long as Maryland could NEVER ban the possession of a mag based upon its capacity. Who knows, maybe if the entire capacity issue is resolved as far as possession is concerned, then we could possibly attack the Maryland statute under the Commerce Clause, maybe.

I think that is the difference, California was a ban on possession.

j_h_smith · Apr 4, 2019

Unless there is another complainant after the 9th clears the way for ownership in CA, nothing will change. However, I do believe eventually, we will either have those rights restored or we'll be digging up those firearms some have talked about burying.

redeye · Apr 4, 2019

The window closes at 5pm Friday. The same judge just issued a stay on his own ruling.

Clearly death threats to the judiciary work.

rockstarr · Apr 6, 2019

redeye said:
The window closes at 5pm Friday. The same judge just issued a stay on his own ruling.

Clearly death threats to the judiciary work.

Why one would issue a stay on his own ruling to help the other side is beyond me...

Allen65 · Apr 6, 2019

rockstarr said:
Why one would issue a stay on his own ruling to help the other side is beyond me...

It prevents a 9CA appellate judge from staying it in a more draconian way. A likely total stay from a progressive 9CA judge would have opened up people who bought mags after the judgement to prosecution for possession and would have required turn-in for destruction for everyone else. The judge did gun owners a favor, even if it doesn't look like it on its face.

Blacksmith101 · Apr 7, 2019

rockstarr said:
Why one would issue a stay on his own ruling to help the other side is beyond me...

The judge knows this is headed to the Supreme Court and thinks, if the court takes it, he will be upheld (his opinion is very complete and detailed). His stay was written to allow the possession to continue "This will also continue until the appeal proceedings conclude or the stay is modified or lifted." So he has not created thousands of felons who simply followed the law in effect at the time and ordered magazines. Only time will tell what will happen.

P-12 Norm · Aug 8, 2022

I am a tad confused....(no surprise there). Was the ruling particularly on the possession of the mags, or the would it apply to the purchase and sale of them, as in MD?

scottyfz6 · Aug 8, 2022

P-12 Norm said:
I am a tad confused....(no surprise there). Was the ruling particularly on the possession of the mags, or the would it apply to the purchase and sale of them, as in MD?

Just mags in cali, when it got bumped to the 9th it would have applied to everything the 9th covered. By bouncing it back down they can limit the coverage. It will have to work its way back up to cover all of the 9th. Then it would have to go to scotus to cover maryland, or a separate case for maryland.

Hopefully cali looses, and they keep fighting it all the way to scotus.

P-12 Norm · Aug 11, 2022

Augie said:
I think that is the difference, California was a ban on possession.

Which is also what NY and NJ suffer with. Which since the 4th Circus has decided our ban on sales is legit, would still give the USSC the reason it needs to jump in, doesn't it? The disparity is enormous, and it is something that causes problems for traveling citizens.

lazarus · Aug 11, 2022

P-12 Norm said:
Which is also what NY and NJ suffer with. Which since the 4th Circus has decided our ban on sales is legit, would still give the USSC the reason it needs to jump in, doesn't it? The disparity is enormous, and it is something that causes problems for traveling citizens.

The other comment is now incorrect. SCOTUS GVR’d the case. That means grant, vacate, and remand.

So they accepted the case, vacated the previous appeals court decision, and sent it back to the appeals court saying “try again”.

Because SCOTUS granted the case, the appeals court decision applies nation wide. Of course SCOTUS can decide to take it back up on appeal if they don’t like the appeals court decision on try 2.

So if the CA or NJ mag ban cases are struck down at the appeals court level on the GVR’d cases that are back at the district/appeals courts now, then the decision applies nationwide.

scottyfz6 · Aug 11, 2022

lazarus said:
The other comment is now incorrect....

So they accepted the case, vacated the previous appeals court decision, and sent it back to the appeals court saying “try again”.

Because SCOTUS granted the case, the appeals court decision applies nation wide. Of course SCOTUS can decide to take it back up on appeal if they don’t like the appeals court decision on try 2.

Ok I assume you mean I was wrong, ok i might be misunderstanding something and thats ok.

But I do have to ask what if I sue challenging that the sky is green the court in MD says your wrong its blue. It goes to the 4th, and they agree with me its green. Then its challenged to scotus who GVR's it. Then the 4th nope we still think its green. What then?

jcutonilli · Aug 11, 2022

lazarus said:
The other comment is now incorrect. SCOTUS GVR’d the case. That means grant, vacate, and remand.

So they accepted the case, vacated the previous appeals court decision, and sent it back to the appeals court saying “try again”.

Because SCOTUS granted the case, the appeals court decision applies nation wide. Of course SCOTUS can decide to take it back up on appeal if they don’t like the appeals court decision on try 2.

So if the CA or NJ mag ban cases are struck down at the appeals court level on the GVR’d cases that are back at the district/appeals courts now, then the decision applies nationwide.

The appeals court decision does not apply nation wide just because SCOTUS granted the case. There is no decision that applies in this situation because the appeals court decision is vacated.

jcutonilli · Aug 11, 2022

scottyfz6 said:
Ok I assume you mean I was wrong, ok i might be misunderstanding something and thats ok.

But I do have to ask what if I sue challenging that the sky is green the court in MD says your wrong its blue. It goes to the 4th, and they agree with me its green. Then its challenged to scotus who GVR's it. Then the 4th nope we still think its green. What then?

The defendants will likely appeal to SCOTUS, who will then decide if they want to take the case based on the revised opinion as to why the sky is green.

lazarus · Aug 11, 2022

jcutonilli said:
The appeals court decision does not apply nation wide just because SCOTUS granted the case. There is no decision that applies in this situation because the appeals court decision is vacated.

My understanding is once the appeals court issues a new opinion it would apply nationwide at that point if SCOTUS turns down a further appeal since SCOTUS had already granted cert. Or SCOTUS can take the case and issue their own opinion if they disagree with the Appeals court decision?

jcutonilli · Aug 12, 2022

lazarus said:
My understanding is once the appeals court issues a new opinion it would apply nationwide at that point if SCOTUS turns down a further appeal since SCOTUS had already granted cert. Or SCOTUS can take the case and issue their own opinion if they disagree with the Appeals court decision?

SCOTUS has not seen the revised opinion. Why would it apply nationwide? SCOTUS did grant the previous opinion, but they vacated that opinion. It is as if it were a new case to SCOTUS, although I would think they would take a closer look to evaluate the reasoning that was used in these cases.

What impact does the CA magazine decision have on MD limits?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Past President, MSI

Major Deplorable

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Banned

Major Deplorable

Ultimate Member

Grumpy Old Man

Why be normal?

Ultimate Member

Why be normal?

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics