The ruling here https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.casd.533515/gov.uscourts.casd.533515.149.0.pdf
This from the start of how we got here
I'm still reading through it but wanted to point this little nugget out that might be a spoiler alert for the AW ban this same judge is about to rule on shortly
I'll have more to say after reading more but wanted to get the good news up for you all .
This from the start of how we got here
From link above said:We begin at the end. California’s ban and mandatory dispossession of firearm magazines holding more than 10 rounds (California Penal Code § 32310(c) and (d)), as amended by Proposition 63, was preliminarily enjoined in 2017.1
That decision was affirmed on appeal.2 In 2019, summary judgment was granted in favor of Plaintiffs and § 32310 in its entirety was judged to be unconstitutional.3 Initially, that decision was also affirmed on appeal.4
However, the decision was re-heard and reversed by the court of appeals en banc. 5
In 2022, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated the appellate en banc decision, and remanded the case.6
The court of appeals, in turn, remanded the case to this Court “for further proceedings consistent with New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n, Inc. v. Bruen,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendant Attorney General Rob Bonta, and his officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and those persons in active concert or participation with him, and those duly sworn state peace officers and federal law enforcement officers who gain knowledge of this injunction order, or know of the existence of this injunction order, are enjoined from enforcing California Penal Code § 32310.
2. Defendant Rob Bonta shall provide, by personal service or otherwise, actual
notice of this order to all law enforcement personnel who are responsible for
implementing or enforcing the enjoined statute. 3. This injunction is stayed for ten (10) days from the date of this Order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: September 22, 2023
I'm still reading through it but wanted to point this little nugget out that might be a spoiler alert for the AW ban this same judge is about to rule on shortly
From link above said:So, the State must demonstrate that its extreme ban is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearms regulation. As explained below, there is no national tradition of prohibiting or regulating firearms based on firing capacity or ammunition capacity.
I'll have more to say after reading more but wanted to get the good news up for you all .
Last edited: