Judge Benitez

[silverado427 10,730]

It looks like Cali's mag ban is kicked to the curb.

 

 

[voyager9 3,434]

CA district court issued injunction against the ban (again).  Stayed for 10 days to give time for CA to appeal to the 9th circus (again).  
 

[diamondd817 827]

U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez in San Diego said California's "sweeping ban" went too far by preventing people from using magazines for lawful purposes, including self-defense.

"The history and tradition of the Second Amendment clearly supports state laws against the use or misuse of firearms with unlawful intent, but not the disarmament of the law-abiding citizen," Benitez wrote in a 71-page decision.

 

 

 

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

I believe that the people out there refer to him as "Saint Benitez."

[DirtyDigz 1,812]

3 hours ago, Old Glock guy said:

I believe that the people out there refer to him as "Saint Benitez."

[gleninjersey 2,141]

Why say it's unconstitutional and then place a stay on it?  

[High Exposure 5,664]

[voyager9 3,434]

1 hour ago, gleninjersey said:

Why say it's unconstitutional and then place a stay on it?  

Probably to avoid having CA cry to the 9th circus for an emergency stay (for the entire appeal process).  Instead by issuing his own stay it disarms CA from trying that tactic and also holds them to a timeline.  

[Downtownv 1,778]

Murphy:

 

[drjjpdc 39]

My guess is since SCOTUS already kicked it back to the 9th circuit, I would think that they would want the 9th circuit to make the decision so they don't have to. This way they avoid any continued hassles about 'liberalizing' gun freedoms. If the 9th circuit makes the decision it sends a strong signal to other circuit courts. I don't know how Illinois could keep up their semi-auto nonsense if the 9th does what's right.

[Downtownv 1,778]

7 hours ago, drjjpdc said:

My guess is since SCOTUS already kicked it back to the 9th circuit, I would think that they would want the 9th circuit to make the decision so they don't have to. This way they avoid any continued hassles about 'liberalizing' gun freedoms. If the 9th circuit makes the decision it sends a strong signal to other circuit courts. I don't know how Illinois could keep up their semi-auto nonsense if the 9th does what's right.

I don't know how NJ could keep up their mag ban/limit.

[Downtownv 1,778]

TRENTON, NJ – A ruling in federal court could impact New Jersey’s ban on high-capacity magazines.

 

https://www.shorenewsnetwork.com/2023/09/23/high-capacity-magazine-bans-unconstitutional-federal-judge-rules/

[GrumpyOldRetiree 38]

I'm  looking forward to calling back my standard capacity magazines out of exile in South Carolina!

[Downtownv 1,778]

Mine are buried w Pablo Escobars cash...

[Ferris 78]

10 hours ago, Downtownv said:

Mine are buried w Pablo Escobars cash...

I buried mine in the international zone in mount olive. Close yet still not NJ... Just kidding ... To be honest my BFF Phil Murphy is holding them in a house in Middletown, someone should get a warrant  for his house and raid at 4:00 am with the ATF and FBI to get them before he ships them to Ukraine and commits an ITR violation.

[gleninjersey 2,141]

15 hours ago, Downtownv said:

I don't know how NJ could keep up their mag ban/limit.

NJ will fight it kick and screaming. 

They won't relent until after the 3rd Circuit Court tells them it's unconstiutional.  Even then, they'll probably try to fight it to the Supreme Court.

[Downtownv 1,778]

My mags are buried w Pablo Escobars cash...

Great to see Trenton on defense.

Fun Times we live in!

[Downtownv 1,778]

On 9/24/2023 at 9:19 PM, gleninjersey said:

NJ will fight it kick and screaming. 

They won't relent until after the 3rd Circuit Court tells them it's unconstiutional.  Even then, they'll probably try to fight it to the Supreme Court.

And they will lose, but the WTF i'ts  our tax dollars they spend, not their own cash.

 

[Ferris 78]

6 minutes ago, Downtownv said:

And they will lose, but the WTF i's tax dollars they spend, not their own.

 

Fiscal and economic responsibility got sick somewhere around 1913 and was killed off in 1944 .  Taxes are just a weapon at this point, you don't need tax dollar when you can print  currency  and export inflation.

[45Doll 5,877]

Well what do you know? It appears we only need 2.2 round mags!

Judge Benitez destroys the 2.2 rounds per DGU lie once and for all – Bearing Arms

Should I slice that 9mm round longitudinally, or do a cross section?

[voyager9 3,434]

The whole argument that the “average” matters is stupid.   As if the relative rarity of the event overshadows that the event occurred at all.    “If it saves but one life!!”…”no, not those lives!”

[124gr9mm 859]

21 hours ago, voyager9 said:

The whole argument that the “average” matters is stupid.   As if the relative rarity of the event overshadows that the event occurred at all.    “If it saves but one life!!”…”no, not those lives!”

The fact that the 2.2 figure was just fiction made up for the argument makes it even more absurd...

[Mrs. Peel 7,157]

Yikes, things are getting very interesting with this Duncan v. Bonta case. It seems some members of the very activist 9th circuit Court of Appeals are trying to play games... by skipping over what would be the "usual" next step in this case of a 3-judge panel. This is apparently a very unorthodox move, and they are getting publicly criticized by some of their own judges for this obviously politicized gamesmanship.

This Four Boxes Diner video explains better than I can:

SHOCKING 2A NEWS IN DUNCAN v. BONTA: Federal Judges ATTACK Ninth Circuit for Being UNFAIR - YouTube

[voyager9 3,434]

8 hours ago, Mrs. Peel said:

It seems some members of the very activist 9th circuit Court of Appeals are trying to play games... by skipping over what would be the "usual" next step in this case of a 3-judge panel.

This may be a good thing in the long term.  The first time through the 3-judge panel at the 9th sided with Benitez only to have it reversed during en banc review.  This time we save time jumping right to en banc.  No point in wasting the time and money with the 3-judge panel when the 9th already knows how they’ll decide.   

The other thing is that the 9th is between a rock and a hard place.  SCOTUS already GVR’d the case once to “reconsider under Bruen”.  Benitez’s ruling is very well reasoned in that context.   The 9th will be hard pressed to overturn without Olympic-level mental gymnastics.  

[GrumpyOldRetiree 38]

6 minutes ago, voyager9 said:

This may be a good thing in the long term.  The first time through the 3-judge panel at the 9th sided with Benitez only to have it reversed during en banc review.  This time we save time jumping right to en banc.  No point in wasting the time and money with the 3-judge panel when the 9th already knows how they’ll decide.   

 

I agree, FWIW. Regardless of the outcome of a 3 judge review this case was predestined to go en banc anyway. This speeds things up by skipping the "middleman". Maybe now we can get a final, national ruling before I croak.

[voyager9 3,434]

11 minutes ago, GrumpyOldRetiree said:

I agree, FWIW. Regardless of the outcome of a 3 judge review this case was predestined to go en banc anyway. This speeds things up by skipping the "middleman". Maybe now we can get a final, national ruling before I croak.

I don’t understand their strategy though.  Usually they try to delay things for as long as possible.  That’s why the 9th GVR’d it back to Benitez in the first place.  Now they decide to skip a step?  Almost like they want to rule on the case before something happens. 

[1LtCAP 4,264]

On 9/22/2023 at 5:58 PM, diamondd817 said:

U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez in San Diego said California's "sweeping ban" went too far by preventing people from using magazines for lawful purposes, including self-defense.

"The history and tradition of the Second Amendment clearly supports state laws against the use or misuse of firearms with unlawful intent, but not the disarmament of the law-abiding citizen," Benitez wrote in a 71-page decision.

 

 

 

stealin this quote

On 9/24/2023 at 6:15 AM, Downtownv said:

I don't know how NJ could keep up their mag ban/limit.

because it appears as if no one fights the illegal restrictions......just the results of getting caught up in the mess.

[GrumpyOldRetiree 38]

1 hour ago, 1LtCAP said:

because it appears as if no one fights the illegal restrictions......just the results of getting caught up in the mess.

If I'm not mistaken, the ANJRPC et al have a mag ban case pending somewhere, but the fight against the carry killer bill is getting all the attention for now.

[DirtyDigz 1,812]

10 minutes ago, GrumpyOldRetiree said:

ANJRPC et al have a mag ban case pending somewhere

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/7147045/association-of-new-jersey-rifle-pistol-clubs-inc-v-grewal/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc
 

IIRC next major event in that case is a hearing/arguments in October.

[CMJeepster 2,778]

9 minutes ago, DirtyDigz said:

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/7147045/association-of-new-jersey-rifle-pistol-clubs-inc-v-grewal/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc
 

IIRC next major event in that case is a hearing/arguments in October.

Correct.  Gun for Hire's podcast this past Sunday touched on that.