Question for the lawyers here

M

Metal god

New member
After the Bruen case the SCOTUS granted cert , vacated and remanded several 2A case . Two of those cases went down to the 9th circuit . The ninth was also holding several 2A case back waiting on the Bruen ruling . They have since sent all those cases back down to the district level .

Ok now to my point , all these CA cases have the same judge . Miller is an AW ban case that the district level judge has ordered briefs on and at this time all briefs are in , Duncan is a magazine capacity restriction/ban case and there briefs have been ordered but not due until later this month . Rhodes is a ammo restriction/background check case and there briefs have not yet been ordered .

Each of these cases were sent down at different times with in the last several months and is likely why they are all at different stages of the process .

However the judge just set a date to hear all three cases on the same day at the same time . Miller is on a 141 MOTION for Reconsideration , Duncan is for a Status Conference , not sure what Rhodes is for but would guess status conference .

How and or why would a judge lump 3 completely different case at different stages of the process together to be heard on the same day at the same time ? Surely each case has it's own lawyers for each side that will want to be heard on the merits . So we will have 3 , 4 or 5+ lawyers for each side there all at the same time arguing three different cases which are at different stages of the process ? Is this normal ?

One theory is that the judge is going to grant a preliminary injunction on them all while letting them all continue at there own pace . The other theory is he plans to rule on them all right then and there .

Why do you think he has lump them all together and what are his options ?

Thanks
MG

EDIT : Just found Rhodes submitted supplemental briefs after Bruen .
https://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/2022-10-13-Appellants-Supp-Reply-Brief.pdf

Maybe the judge thinks the supplementals are good enough for a ruling .
 
Last edited:
I'm not a lawyer but my gut tells me that this is not a good sign for those promoting gun rights. Being where that court is located, I would not be surprised if the judge allows only limited input and then rules that any and all gun control measures under consideration are valid and Constitutional.
 
This judge already ruled on all three of these cases the last couple years and ruled them all unconstitutional . In his ruling he actually used the text and history method of analysis. That was before the Bruen case . If anything the judge’s previous decision was validated with the Bruen case . Most believe this will be a huge smack down of the anti gun state .
 
I'll be there in the court room on the 12th , don't think there's much to say until then , but will report that afternoon what happened in court .

At this time all briefs are in on all three cases which was not the case when I started this thread . The scuttlebutt is that nothing major is expected like we hoped when all three were scheduled for the same day and time . Miller seems like the furthest along and can be ruled on but seems odd to have a big ruling come down literally at the same time he is hearing other cases on 2nd amendment issues .

My hope was that he ( the judge) grants preliminary injunctions on all three . IMHO after the Bruen case he could easily believe all three are likely to win on there merits and grant a PI . The problem is if he does do that the state will appeal to the 9th which based on there track record in 2nd amendment cases will reverse that PI with in 24hrs .

I was at the last Miller hearing and he made it crystal clear he wants that case buttoned up quickly stating both sides have waited long enough for the outcome to be final and he believes we are at a point where this is now unfair for both side to not have this resolved after 3 years . Based on that I don't think he plans on sitting on these cases very long .

It's been noted elsewhere that this judge seems to like to release his big rulings around large holidays which has lead some to speculate we may see some rulings right before xmas . Many hoped thanksgiving was going to be that holiday :( nope
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top