Oral Arguments heard in California Magazine Ban Appeal at Ninth Circuit ~ VIDEO

Stack Pile Ammunition Gun Magazines High Capacity Standard
Stock Pile Ammunition Gun Magazines High Capacity Standard

U.S.A.-(Ammoland.com)- On 2 April, 2020, a three-judge panel from the Ninth Circuit heard oral arguments in the Duncan v. Becerra case. The District Court had decided the outright ban of magazines with a capacity of more than 10 rounds violated the Second Amendment. The opinion, by Judge Roger T. Benitez, was brilliant and extremely well written.

The video lasts over an hour, with strong questioning by the judges. Judge Consuelo Callahan presides and does most of the questioning. Judge Kenneth K. Lee asks some pointed questions, and Judge Barbara M. Lynn asks a few questions.

The appealing attorney for the State of California was John Darrow Echeveria.

The plaintiffs' attorney for Duncan and the Second Amendment was Erin E.  Murphy.

The State of California did its best at attempting to reduce the Second Amendment right to the minimum possible under the Heller ruling. The argument made was essentially, if California residents had access to some effective means of self-defense in the home, then Heller was satisfied, and the State could ban and regulate almost anything they wished to do.

When asked if the ban could be extended from a 10 round ban to a 1 round ban, Echeveria thought that might be unconstitutional.

This argument was specifically rejected in Heller as being off the table, but the Ninth Circuit has worked hard to forward it.

The attorney representing Duncan and Second Amendment supporters, generally, simply reiterated the Heller and McDonald decisions. Weapons in common use which are used for lawful purposes are protected by the Second Amendment. In particular, a complete ban is off the table.

When asked if the ban violated the “takings clause” of the Constitution, Murphy said it was primarily an issue of compensation.

The State made the claim that limiting magazine capacity was merely reasonable regulation that did not impact the Second Amendment.  It relied on several court cases from other circuits.

This is what happens when the Supreme Court refuses to enforce its previous rulings. Several appellate courts are adamantly hostile to the exercise of Second Amendment rights. They have relegated the Second Amendment to a second class right, as noted by Justice Thomas.

The oral arguments are interesting. They probably make little difference. The finding of the three-judge panel will not be final.

The Ninth Circuit has shown, again and again, Second Amendment rulings will go to an En Banc court.

The makeup of the Ninth Circuit has changed considerably under President Trump. Once a bastion of leftist ideology, which was the most reversed Circuit in the United States, it now has nine judges appointed by President Trump. The Circuit has 29 judges. The Circuit now has a three-judge majority appointed by Democrats.

Not all judges appointed by Republicans are originalist and textualists. They tend in that direction. The Ninth Circuit now has some balance, instead of being overwhelmingly leftist.

One of the judges on the three-judge panel, Judge Lee, was appointed by President Trump.

Shop all our money-saving magazine deals in one place!


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 retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

18
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
8 Comment threads
10 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
14 Comment authors
Brian CFinnkyterminator2tetejaunmikeL Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
terminator2
Member
terminator2

I’m confused, why would Judge Barbara Lynn be hearing a case on the 9th District when she’s not on the list of 9th Circuit Judges? She is listed as follows:

Barbara M. G. Lynn (born September 19, 1952)[1][2] is the Chief United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, with chambers in Dallas, Texas.[1]

That is the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals that covers among others the State of Texas.

She was appointed by Clinton.

Anyone know why?

Brian C
Member
Brian C

Local 9th Circuit Court Rules state, under Selection of Panels: “It is Court policy that district judges not participate in the disposition of appeals from their own districts. In addition, the Court attempts to avoid assigning district judges to appeals of cases over which other judges from their district have presided (either on motions or at trial) as visiting judges in other districts.” Judges at the district court level are often sitting on assignment to help with the overburdened circuit. Bottom line is that having a Texas district court judge on assignment eliminates the possibility that a judge within the… Read more »

tetejaun
Member
tetejaun

In the Declaration of Independence, it states “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” “that to secure these rights…” meaning “these rights” that were pre-existing and belonged to and held by the People. Since the “rights” existed before a servant government was created by the People, to “secure” said rights, there can… Read more »

Finnky
Member
Finnky

@TTJ – Important to remember that government derives its power from consent of the governed. I occasionally raise this as a question to “gun control supporters”, as in if laws offend enough people – does that impact legitimacy of that government? Always get one of two answers (1) the law is the law and you must obey no matter what or (2) subject change such as “for the children”. Answer (1) indicates someone living in fantasy land, who loves tyranny and opposes freedom while (2) indicates a total lack of concern for children. I want my children and grandchildren to… Read more »

nobodyuknow
Member
nobodyuknow

Good shot by Erin! This is going to end up in the Supreme Court!

mikeL
Member
mikeL

Nah! Don’t think so. SCOTUS skirts 2nd A issues.

gregs
Member
gregs

it was a long video, but erin killed it. only thing I would tell her is to not let leftists dictate verbiage and use the term standard capacity instead of large capacity magazine. all my firearms came from the factory with magazines that hold more than 10 round magazines except my glock 26, which is able to use a glock 19 or 17 magazine if I want. also how is the government able to tell you what you need for self-defense?

Laddyboy
Member
Laddyboy

“You can legally keep your more than 10 round magazine – – BUT you would be breaking the law if you use them. What an ASININE COMMENT BY THE STATE.
FYI: The STANDARD capacity of NORMAL “AR rifles / Modern Sporting Rifles” is 30 rounds and/or 20 round magazines!!!!
Intermediate scrutiny does NOT APPLY to ANY or EVERY Second Amendment court argument!
ANY and EVERY Second Amendment argument brought before the courts – – MUST be held under STRICT scrutiny.

Arny
Member
Arny

SHALL NOT INFRINGE , should end all. Damn Wordsmiths.

Bill
Member
Bill

Wow! Are those words (“shall not be infringed”) actually in there, with a legal significance? If so, how come people in office don’t seem to notice them, or think that they have any important meaning?

tetejaun
Member
tetejaun

Be more specific…post where president Trump stated he worked for himself and not the American people. As for whether the government may infringe on the Second Amendment, it is THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE ABSOLUTE POWER AND AUTHORITY to stop such infringements. Remember that Second Amendment? Read the Federalist Papers. But, the screaming yellow cowards that call themselves Americans today will never jeopardize their beer, Cheetos and bassetball. Heck, America is being invaded by illegal aliens and Americans don’t object, NO, they welcome these invaders. Americans are brainwashed to kneel to the government, who is their master and they are far… Read more »

tetejaun
Member
tetejaun

As long as cowardly Americans kneel to the tyrants and obey the unconstitutional ‘gun control laws’, nothing will change.

nrringlee
Member
nrringlee

The operative concept in the Second Amendment is personal defense, yes, but not against errant coyotes and the occasional serial rapist. No, it is personal and community defense against a corrupt government. Define corrupt government? Yes please. A government that does not trust its own citizens with God Given natural rights. That is the foundation of tyranny. Antidote? An armed and competent population willing and capable of confronting tyranny with equal or better firepower. Leftist should get this. I don’t understand how they can see Trump as a serial rapist totalitarian and in the same breath desire to be completely… Read more »

Finnky
Member
Finnky

@nrringlee – Have directly asked many a leftist this exact thing. Have yet to get much better than a blank look back. To a person, they lack comprehension of personal responsibility for themselves or toward society.

The other Jim
Member
The other Jim

Listen to that voice…Judge Consuelo Callahan. That was rough to get threw, that voice.

Native
Member
Native

I hope you got through it because Judge Callahan and “that voice” obliterated Echeverria.

And, she’s apparently a Sig fan.