anti-gunners denied part in Ammo Background check lawsuit

Discussion of Firearm Politics & Legislation. This forum is now strictly limited to discussions directly related to firearms.

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Bruenor
Posts: 7306
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:03 pm
Location: Geneva, OH

anti-gunners denied part in Ammo Background check lawsuit

Post by Bruenor »

Judge denies motions from Giffords, Brady, and Everytown to participate in the California ammo background check lawsuit

I am really liking U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez. This is the same judge that is overseeing the Miller vs Becerra CA AWB Case, and also the same judge that struck down the ban on High Capacity magazines ( Duncan vs. Becerra ), allowing thousands of standard capacity magazines to flow into CA for about a week, before a stay on the order was issued awaiting appeal.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov ... 5.56.0.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Movants Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Brady and
Movant Everytown for Gun Safety Fund seek leave to participate in the action as
amici curiae. Courts have broad discretion to consider amicus briefs and appoint
amicus curiae. In this case the movants seek to assist in the defense of Proposition
63. However, the Defendant Xavier Becerra, in his official capacity as Attorney
General of the State of California, is well-equipped to defend the statutes at issue.
Therefore, the Court denies the motions of Movants
Guess he figures the states AG is a big boy and should be able to argue his own case.
Μολὼν λαβέ

"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."

- Thomas Paine

"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."

- Thomas Jefferson
User avatar
Bruenor
Posts: 7306
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:03 pm
Location: Geneva, OH

Re: anti-gunners denied part in Ammo Background check lawsui

Post by Bruenor »

Oral Arguments for Duncan vs. Bercarra
https://youtu.be/JhlsgZUIDis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Μολὼν λαβέ

"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."

- Thomas Paine

"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."

- Thomas Jefferson
machinegunkelly
Posts: 128
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 11:56 am
Location: redmencountry

Re: anti-gunners denied part in Ammo Background check lawsui

Post by machinegunkelly »

Lady judge with big glasses, seems to be a gun owner. She also appeared to be knowledgeable about firearms.
MGK
User avatar
Bruenor
Posts: 7306
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:03 pm
Location: Geneva, OH

Re: anti-gunners denied part in Ammo Background check lawsui

Post by Bruenor »

An attorneys comments on the oral arguments for Duncan vs. Bercarra.

https://www.artemishq.com/7785-2/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The State’s attorney started his presentation and was quickly interrupted by Justice Callahan; she wanted to know two things that were weighing on her mind: First, should they be interpreting the statute under strict scrutiny?
The State said strict scrutiny was not the proper level of review and, instead, suggested an intermediate level of review was more appropriate. However, in the State’s rebuttal period he butchered the definition of strict scrutiny,
The State did concede, under questioning, that a magazine restriction of one round per mag would be too egregious notwithstanding Constitutional scrutiny, but it feels that ten rounds is more than ample for self defense… essentially because it says so.

Erin Murphy… (our side’s attorney) did a very, very good job of bootstrapping the “common use” doctrine into her presentation. The justices were definitely not adversarial in their questioning of her… more inquisitorial.
Justice Callahan had asked (using proper nomenclature… I think she is a gun owner) If she acquired a standard capacity magazine for her “Sig” when it was legal to do so, and she is a law-abiding citizen, does the statute at bar turn her into a criminal? The State was ultimately forced to conclude that, yes, it does.
Μολὼν λαβέ

"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."

- Thomas Paine

"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."

- Thomas Jefferson
Post Reply