Breaking: Peruta to be Heard En Banc

By Dean WeingartenNinthCircuitCourt of Appeals

Dean Weingarten
Dean Weingarten

Arizona – -(Ammoland.com)- The common sense ruling that the second amendment applies outside of the home in the Peruta court case in the Ninth Circuit will now be decided by a hearing of an en banc panel of the justices of the Circuit.

Decided in favor of the plaintiff, procedural motions eventually led to a at least one judge calling for the en banc hearing, sua sponte.  Thought to be unlikely because of both the clear ruling and the rarity of en banc hearings, the Ninth none the less voted to hear the case en banc.  The notice of the vote was published on Thursday, the 26th of March.  Here is the notice(pdf) that was published:

THOMAS, Chief Judge:
Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(a) and Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion and order denying
motions to intervene shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.

Peruta has already been cited in several cases, notably in cases involving the issue of carry permits in Hawaii, Washington D.C. and in counties of California other than San Diego.

It was cited in a case that struck down regulations of the Army Corps of Engineers in Idaho.

Now a panel of judges will be selected from the Ninth Circuit, and will reconsider the ruling.  The Ninth Circuit is large, so the panel will not consist of all justices but of 11 justices chosen at random.

c2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch

About Dean Weingarten;

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

  • 4
    Leave a Reply

    Please Login to comment
    3 Comment threads
    1 Thread replies
    0 Followers
     
    Most reacted comment
    Hottest comment thread
    4 Comment authors
    Gary SanfordNavy DaveyPaul ClarkCharles Nichols Recent comment authors
      Subscribe  
    Notify of
    Gary Sanford
    Guest
    Gary Sanford

    Old way of thinking: Open-carry is proper because we have the Constitution right to defend ourselves, obviously. Concealed-carry is improper because you’re hiding your weapon, people nearby have a right to know you’ve got a weapon. New way of thinking: Open-carry is improper because it scares people nearby to see a gun on your civilian hip. Concealed-carry is proper because we have the right to defend ourselves, the carrier doesn’t want to frighten anyone, what people nearby don’t know won’t alarm them. Unvarished truth: The Constitution has nothing to do with how these decisions are made. If it did, it… Read more »

    Paul Clark
    Guest
    Paul Clark

    First of all, please show me the words in the second amendment that take note of how, where or when we have the right to keep and bare arms. The words OPEN or Concealed do not appear in the wording of the second amendment Only a clairvoyant or an idiot could come up with such reasoning. The constitution makes it very clear that words that do not exist in the writing of anything in the constitution do not and can not exist. The constitution is to be enforced as written, not as anyone would wish it to be written. An… Read more »

    Charles Nichols
    Guest
    Charles Nichols

    That wasn’t the ruling of the Peruta three judge court. The Peruta defendant did not argue that the Second Amendment is limited to the home, he argued that Peruta was challenging the wrong law. Instead of seeking a concealed carry permit, Peruta should have challenged the Open Carry ban. Two of the three judges on the Peruta panel went off the rails when they said that California can ban Open Carry in favor of concealed carry. Now that decision is vacated and when the en banc decision is published, Peruta and all of California’s concealed carry cases will fail leaving… Read more »

    Navy Davey
    Guest
    Navy Davey

    Peruta decision by 9th Circuit Feb 2014 said that disallowing both concealed carry AND open carry violates the 2nd Amendment and is thus unconstitutional. 2 of 3 Judges.
    Now review by 11 9th Circuit Judges will review the case and the ruling. If precedent counts, California, being liberal and Progressive, will likely rule against guns in public by citizens. Rights are for criminals, LGBT’s, government employees,and illegals. Only. Not for common peon citizen civilians.
    Heller and Peruta are law only by the slimmest of margins in our Courts. Expect next ruling to be likewise. 6-5.