Carralero vs Bonta : Cali anti bruen case : FED judge issues PI

[swinokur]

 

[swinokur]

The only constitutional right to safety is enshrined in the 2A.

What a moron

 

[krucam]

The FPC is freaking savage.

So Christmasy sounding, lol…

 

[swinokur]

Sounds like a Peanuts Christmas

 

[Stoveman]

FPC isn't tired of spiking the ball, LOL.

 

[fishgutzy]

Note that Newscums response explains, very clearly, why one will not find a "right to safety" anywhere in the Constitution.
He proved, beyond a doubt, the gov't can and does use a made-up right to safety to trample all other Constitutional rights.
Just look back at COVID response to see a ton beyond the douche nozzle example.
Anyone who tells you there is a right to safety is telling you that they believe their are no rights. Only privileges that a granted and removed at the whim of the ruling class.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

 

[rbird7282]

FPC isn't tired of spiking the ball, LOL.

Savages. LMAO

 

[delaware_export]

Annnnnnddddd that didn’t take long. notice of appeal filed…

Carralero v. Bonta - FPC Law 2A Challenge to California Public Carry Bans

Carralero v. Bonta - FPC Law 2A Challenge to California Public Carry Bans

www.firearmspolicy.org

 

[krucam]

While under Appeal to CA9, the clean-up of the District Ct ruling continues. The law 'was' to go into effect Jan 1. The defendants want the District ruling stayed (the law goes into effect) pending CA9 appeal.

FPC will be responding to the defendants request today, Dec 27th.

Printer's going brrrr....

 

[krucam]

FPC has filed their opposition to a Stay pending Appeal…

 

[kcbrown]

FPC has filed their opposition to a Stay pending Appeal…

The stay will, of course, be granted, even if the Duncan en banc panel has to get involved…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[swinokur]

9 CA merits panel has dissolved the admin stay so the injunction is back in effect.

Carry in sensitive places now legal again.

 

[Boxcab]

The stay will, of course, be granted, even if the Duncan en banc panel has to get involved…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can't assume the old status quo anymore.


.

Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk

 

[bcr229]

https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-appeals-court-prevents-california-banning-guns-most-public-places-2024-01-07/

 

[swinokur]

 

[kcbrown]

Can't assume the old status quo anymore.

Oh yes we can. The composition on the 9th Circuit hasn't shifted to a pro-2A majority. All we can say is that there is some indication that the merits panel is composed of a pro-2A majority. But we know that the 9th Circuit as a whole is not.

With respect to this panel order to lift the stay of the district court's injunction, I expect CA to request en banc review of it, for that to be granted, and for the stay to be reimposed by the en banc panel that comes of it.

It may even be that the en banc panel that does so winds up being the one for Duncan.

And since the Supreme Court has already shown that it is uninterested in any 2A cases for which the final decision hasn't been rendered, we can expect the Supreme Court to deny cert to any appeal to the en banc panel's decision to reimpose the stay.

 

[Boxcab]

Oh yes we can. The composition on the 9th Circuit hasn't shifted to a pro-2A majority. All we can say is that there is some indication that the merits panel is composed of a pro-2A majority.
[Snip]

Yeah, the 9th is bad, but the stay has been lifted for now.

We will see.



.



Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk

 

[Occam]

Yeah, the 9th is bad, but the stay has been lifted for now.

We will see.

And of course all of this is pending their actual ruling. Nobody can haul it off to an en banc or otherwise appeal it until that happens. And maybe these couple of judges will decide to play the inverse-4C, and just sit on it for a couple or three years for the lulz.

 

[pcfixer]

And of course all of this is pending their actual ruling. Nobody can haul it off to an en banc or otherwise appeal it until that happens. And may these couple of judges will decide to play the inverse-4C, and just sit on it for a couple or three years for the lulz.

Yeah...and that sucks, judicial activism.

 

[swinokur]

SAF VICTORY! FED. APPEALS COURT RESTORES BLOCK OF CA CCW LAW​

BELLEVUE, WA – The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed an earlier order which put a hold on a lower court ruling that blocked California’s new law prohibiting concealed carry in most public places, handing a significant victory to gun rights groups including the Second Amendment Foundation.



The law had been blocked by U.S. District Court Judge Cormac J. Carney, who declared the statute “repugnant to the Second Amendment, and openly defiant of the Supreme Court.” The case is known as May v. Bonta.



“This is a major win for California gun owners and the Second Amendment,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “It is a definite wake-up call to anti-gun Gov. Gavin Newsom and his Democrat colleagues in the California legislature who pushed through the ‘sensitive places’ law as a way of thumbing their nose at the Supreme Court, as well as the Constitution.”



Joining SAF in its case are Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation, Gun Owners of California, Liberal Gun Owners Association, the California Rifle & Pistol Association and eleven private citizens. They are represented by attorneys C.D. Michel, Sean A. Brady and Konstadinos T. Moros at Michel & Associates in Long Beach, and Donald Kilmer, Law Offices of Don Kilmer, Caldwell, Idaho.



“Judge Carney correctly sees California’s law as an affront to the Constitution,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “We’re delighted the Ninth Circuit Court will allow his order, blocking the law to remain in effect. We certainly expect to prevail.”



The “sensitive places” law was California’s response to the 2022 Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which established new parameters on handling and deciding Second Amendment cases.