Jump to content
Downtownv

This affects US! California mag ban getting SCOTUS scrutiny

Recommended Posts

California mag ban getting SCOTUS scrutiny

 
By Cam Edwards | Mar 03, 2022 5:30 PM ET

 

Add a challenge to California’s ban on “high capacity” magazines to the growing list of litigation dealing with gun control laws that’s piling up before the Supreme Court. The NRA and the California Rifle & Pistol Association have filed a cert petition with SCOTUS asking them to hear the case, known as Duncan v. Bonta, which directly takes on the state law that not only bans the buying and selling of magazines that can hold more than ten rounds, but retroactively banned the possession of them as well.

On today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co we’re taking a closer look at the petition and the arguments it raises, starting with the three questions presented by the plaintiffs to the Court:

1. Whether a blanket, retrospective, and confiscatory law prohibiting ordinary law-abiding citizens from possessing magazines in common use violates the Second Amendment.

2. Whether a law dispossessing citizens without compensation of property that was lawfully acquired and long possessed without incident violates the Takings Clause.

3. Whether the “two-step” approach that the Ninth Circuit and other lower courts apply to Second Amendment challenges is consistent with the Constitution and this Court’s precedent.

The last question will hopefully be answered by the Supreme Court’s pending decision in NYSRPA v. Bruenbut Duncan v. Bonta would be a great vehicle for the Court to weigh in on the constitutionality of bans of guns and arms that are in common use, as well as the more specific Takings Clause issue raised by the California mag ban, which requires gun owners to either permanently modify their mags to a 10-round limit, turn them in to law enforcement, or take them out of the state.

The first question shouldn’t be a difficult one for the Court to address. As plaintiff’s attorney Paul Clement argues in his brief, the Supreme Court’s guidance in Heller, McDonald, and Caetano has been clear and consistent: arms that are in common use for a variety of lawful purposes are protected by the Second Amendment.

The Ninth Circuit held that these utterly commonplace and constitutionally protected magazines not only can be banned prospectively, but can be confiscated, without running afoul of the Second Amendment. But the state may not prohibit what the Constitution protects. And it certainly may not do so retrospectively by confiscating lawfully acquired and constitutionally protected property that has been safely possessed for decades. That the decision below upheld such a law is proof positive of the pressing need for the Court’s intervention.

As for the mag ban and the Takings Clause, Clement’s brief makes the case that the Ninth Circuit employed some tortured logic about why it doesn’t apply, and erred in doing so.

The en banc court dismissed petitioners’ takings claim only by embracing positions that are at profound odds with this Court’s precedents. The panel held that California’s ban effects no physical taking because the law allows property owners to “modify or sell” their property, rather than surrender it. But the panel missed the forest for the trees: None of those so-called “options” provides a viable way for ordinary, law-abiding citizens to keep their constitutionally protected property. There can be no question that three of the means of compliance— surrendering the magazine to law enforcement, transferring or selling it to someone else, or removing it from the state —require physical dispossession. The owner must literally hand the property over to a third party or “keep” it somewhere where it cannot actually be possessed.

… The Ninth Circuit’s effort to exempt firearms from the scope of the Takings Clause is both wrong and upside down. It is bad enough to hold that the state may flatly prohibit citizens from possessing what the Constitution protects. To hold that the state may freely confiscate what the Constitution protects without even providing just compensation adds constitutional insult to constitutional injury. Even if that result could somehow be reconciled with the Second Amendment, there is no Second Amendment exception to the Takings Clause.

Now, the odds of the Court taking any particular case are always slim, and given the fact that we have nearly a half-dozen challenges that could be granted cert by the justices, I don’t want to get overly optimistic about Duncan v. Bonta‘s potential. Still, the constitutionality of magazine bans is an open question, and given the fact that the Ninth Circuit is 50-for-50 in upholding gun control laws since the Heller decision was handed down in 2008, it’s long past time for SCOTUS to step up and smack down the unserious reasoning that has been used to keep some truly terrible and unconstitutional laws on the books.

California’s reply brief is due April 1st, so we’ve got few weeks before the Court will officially consider the case in conference, and it could be even longer before we learn what, if anything, justices plan to do with Duncan. Fingers crossed that there are at least four members of the Court who sees the Ninth Circuit’s en banc decision for what it is; a flagrant violation of the Court’s own precedents, and one that cannot be allowed to stand.

  • Like 2
  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This could be BIG for us in NJ. The Mag capacity limit is obviously a useless bit of legislation on its face, but what it does do is limit the number of online resellers who will ship to us.  I just spent 3 hours pricing guns online and the one that I want I can't find unless I am willing to pay $130+ more for it than it's being sold for on a dozen other sites.  All of who will not ship to NJ.  

I am assuming these stores just fear any hassle due to the laws here? Is that out of ignorance I wonder.   It's almost as ridiculous as the law itself.  I wonder how much money they are losing by not shipping to us and the other 6 or 7 states they ban. 

My FFL dealer will accept mags over 10 rounds, they just automatically pin them to make them compliant and then tack $15 for each one onto my bill. I'm happy to pay it.  That's cheap IMO. 

I've purchased multiple handguns online with and without magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.  It's not a problem.  Just take my money, send it to my FF licensed gun dealers store and we will take it from there there.  It drives me nuts.  These laws do achieve one goal and that is to prevent people who don't have a lot of money from buying a gun.   

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, JMonica said:

...I've purchased multiple handguns online with and without magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.  It's not a problem.  Just take my money, send it to my FF licensed gun dealers store and we will take it from there there.  It drives me nuts.  These laws do achieve one goal and that is to prevent people who don't have a lot of money from buying a gun.   

The newbie has broken the code!

Congrats, JMonica!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, njJoniGuy said:

iThe newbie has broken the code!

Congrats, JMonica!

hehe Thanks.  One trend I am noticing, and thanks BTW for confirming it.  I really felt like maybe I had just had a few unfortunate interactions with people who were just unhappy or having a bad day, but no, it wasn't just by chance that I happened to come in contact with people who seemed to not want to have anything to do with anyone who couldn't strip an AR in 2 minutes blindfolded with one hand tied behind their backs.  Nope, every meathead I've talked to since I started collecting guns, have been people who spend more on ammo then they do food and the majority of them seem to be generally anti-social people who make it clear, that if you're just getting into this hobby, because tats all it is, then they don't want to have anything to do with you because you are beneath them because you know less. 

Hey, njJoniGuy, whether you realize it or not, you're one of those guys!  At least now I can confidentially stop giving gun people in NJ the benefit of the doubt.  I know where you're coming from and so it's all good.  There are plenty of places I can get my information from and I realize that no, I don't have to go through a public hazing to do it.  After all,  I don't think any of us got into guns for the comradery.  It would have been nice to meet some cool like minded people who I could relate to and who weren't one of "those guys" but whatever.. 

I'm glad that I came to this epiphany before I got totally entrenched in the NJ gun culture and one day discovered I was attending a wedding where everyone was wearing camo tuxedos and I blended right in.   Oof, I dodged a bullet there huh? 

And before I piss-off for good, please know that I won't waste any more of your time by posting my uneducated, newbie thoughts and comments and I am sorry that I couldn't live up to lofty standards you guys have set for this very complex hobby.  Standards matter Mate! 

It's no wonder that all of these NJ forums seem to have few or just a couple of long time members who actively post and why the activity is so low.   No noobs allowed! Got it!  

Best of luck to you all.  You're replies will fall on deaf ears, so don't waste your time. I'm going to the range!  Goodbye forever.  

  • FacePalm 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JMonica said:

hehe Thanks.  One trend I am noticing, and thanks BTW for confirming it.  I really felt like maybe I had just had a few unfortunate interactions with people who were just unhappy or having a bad day, but no, it wasn't just by chance that I happened to come in contact with people who seemed to not want to have anything to do with anyone who couldn't strip an AR in 2 minutes blindfolded with one hand tied behind their backs.  Nope, every meathead I've talked to since I started collecting guns, have been people who spend more on ammo then they do food and the majority of them seem to be generally anti-social people who make it clear, that if you're just getting into this hobby, because tats all it is, then they don't want to have anything to do with you because you are beneath them because you know less. 

Hey, njJoniGuy, whether you realize it or not, you're one of those guys!  At least now I can confidentially stop giving gun people in NJ the benefit of the doubt.  I know where you're coming from and so it's all good.  There are plenty of places I can get my information from and I realize that no, I don't have to go through a public hazing to do it.  After all,  I don't think any of us got into guns for the comradery.  It would have been nice to meet some cool like minded people who I could relate to and who weren't one of "those guys" but whatever.. 

I'm glad that I came to this epiphany before I got totally entrenched in the NJ gun culture and one day discovered I was attending a wedding where everyone was wearing camo tuxedos and I blended right in.   Oof, I dodged a bullet there huh? 

And before I piss-off for good, please know that I won't waste any more of your time by posting my uneducated, newbie thoughts and comments and I am sorry that I couldn't live up to lofty standards you guys have set for this very complex hobby.  Standards matter Mate! 

It's no wonder that all of these NJ forums seem to have few or just a couple of long time members who actively post and why the activity is so low.   No noobs allowed! Got it!  

Best of luck to you all.  You're replies will fall on deaf ears, so don't waste your time. I'm going to the range!  Goodbye forever.  

C'mon, don't get your feelings hurt. I "Liked" your post ,it was factual. They make it expensive to own a gun in this fucked up state, but we have some positive things in SCOTUS right now that could turn the scumbags in Trenton on the heads. That's not to say they will do everything they can to skirt the decision. At least stick around so we can do the pee pee dance for a while.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, JMonica said:

Hey, njJoniGuy, whether you realize it or not, you're one of those guys!  At least now I can confidentially stop giving gun people in NJ the benefit of the doubt...  

Well...OK.

I think you read into his post a little too much.

He was actually complimenting you on making a valid point that a lot of people don't think about.

Maybe you came here looking for a fight?

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JohnnyB said:

His attitude is that NJ gun people are meatheads and unfriendly

OMG, JMoaner is Archie Bunker.  There's no point in trying to figure out JM.  For whatever reason this person has a big chip weighing down on their shoulder and is easily triggered, which in turn has annoyed folks on other forums.  Now JM has a paranoid delusion that all gun people are big meanies.  Everyone's out to get him/her.

 

16 hours ago, JMonica said:

And before I piss-off for good, please know that I won't waste any more of your time by posting my uneducated, newbie thoughts and comments and I am sorry that I couldn't live up to lofty standards you guys have set for this very complex hobby..........

Best of luck to you all.  You're replies will fall on deaf ears, so don't waste your time. I'm going to the range!  Goodbye forever.  

That almost reads like a suicide note from a snowflake that never met their parent's standards.   Que up Adam's Song.   Except, about an hour after declaring "forever" the user logged back in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, 124gr9mm said:

Well...OK.

I think you read into his post a little too much.

He was actually complimenting you on making a valid point that a lot of people don't think about.

Maybe you came here looking for a fight?

Looks to me like JMonica came here looking for a fight. The only thing njJohniGuy said was that JMonica finally realized what everyone else already knew but JMonica went on a shit on all 2A rampage. Looks like JMonica needs to grow a little thicker skin. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MartyZ said:

I can't wait to un-modify all my pistol mags.

Surely you jest! Any modifications were permanent, were they not?

 

I look forward to retrieving my regular mags from the temporary custody of the person that is legally allowed to have been possessing them.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Mr.Stu said:

Surely you jest! Any modifications were permanent, were they not?

 

I look forward to retrieving my regular mags from the temporary custody of the person that is legally allowed to have been possessing them.

They were permanent, I would have to break the baseplates and get new ones, that requires machining.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mr.Stu said:

I look forward to retrieving my regular mags from the temporary custody of the person that is legally allowed to have been possessing them.

Mine are vacationing down south where life is good. If they don't come back I'll join them someday.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/15/2022 at 8:05 PM, JMonica said:

hehe Thanks.  One trend I am noticing, and thanks BTW for confirming it.  I really felt like maybe I had just had a few unfortunate

[A bunch of holy shit please calm down edited out]

Best of luck to you all.  You're replies will fall on deaf ears, so don't waste your time. I'm going to the range!  Goodbye forever.  

1) You live in new jersey, you have to have a thicker skin than this. 

2) He wasn't mocking your lack of knowledge. He was congratulating you on finally realizing that the point of the laws is not to get compliance but to discourage ownership in general and specifically make it fiscally impossible for certain demographics that certain groups rely on for votes to potentially do something like take their safety into their own hands or become part of a group that tends not to vote for said certain groups. 

 

 

  • Agree 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/16/2022 at 1:46 PM, Mr.Stu said:

Surely you jest! Any modifications were permanent, were they not?

 

I look forward to retrieving my regular mags from the temporary custody of the person that is legally allowed to have been possessing them.

@Mr.Stu THIS^^^.  I have 46 1/2 YEARS worth of mags at my son & dil's house in Pennsy.  Guarded by a pair of the Queen's Dogs and a pair of cats.  No trespasser dare enter The alarm would sound and said person would instantly become the center of affection :) 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/15/2022 at 7:05 PM, JMonica said:

hehe Thanks.  One trend I am noticing, and thanks BTW for confirming it.  I really felt like maybe I had just had a few unfortunate interactions with people who were just unhappy or having a bad day, but no, it wasn't just by chance that I happened to come in contact with people who seemed to not want to have anything to do with anyone who couldn't strip an AR in 2 minutes blindfolded with one hand tied behind their backs.  Nope, every meathead I've talked to since I started collecting guns, have been people who spend more on ammo then they do food and the majority of them seem to be generally anti-social people who make it clear, that if you're just getting into this hobby, because tats all it is, then they don't want to have anything to do with you because you are beneath them because you know less. 

Hey, njJoniGuy, whether you realize it or not, you're one of those guys!  At least now I can confidentially stop giving gun people in NJ the benefit of the doubt.  I know where you're coming from and so it's all good.  There are plenty of places I can get my information from and I realize that no, I don't have to go through a public hazing to do it.  After all,  I don't think any of us got into guns for the comradery.  It would have been nice to meet some cool like minded people who I could relate to and who weren't one of "those guys" but whatever.. 

I'm glad that I came to this epiphany before I got totally entrenched in the NJ gun culture and one day discovered I was attending a wedding where everyone was wearing camo tuxedos and I blended right in.   Oof, I dodged a bullet there huh? 

And before I piss-off for good, please know that I won't waste any more of your time by posting my uneducated, newbie thoughts and comments and I am sorry that I couldn't live up to lofty standards you guys have set for this very complex hobby.  Standards matter Mate! 

It's no wonder that all of these NJ forums seem to have few or just a couple of long time members who actively post and why the activity is so low.   No noobs allowed! Got it!  

Best of luck to you all.  You're replies will fall on deaf ears, so don't waste your time. I'm going to the range!  Goodbye forever.  

Wow dude, switch to decaf. 
 

I think njJoniGuy’s post was being a bit tongue in cheek. IMHO he wasn’t being personally ugly to you. 
 

One can’t be of thin skin and hang around here too long. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...