Supreme Court decision brings end to CA Handgun Roster

[LiveLife]

The Supreme Court's ruling in NYSRPA v Bruen resulted in a new challenge to the California handgun roster case Renna v Bonta and AB 2847 (Microstamping).

https://rumble.com/v1b9vds-supreme-court-decision-brings-end-to-california-handgun-roster.html

• CA approved roster of handguns limits handguns sold in the state - https://www.oag.ca.gov/firearms/certified-handguns/search
• Law enforcement officers are exempt from the roster thus creating an expensive availability of "CA legal" off-roster handguns
• Addition of new handgun to the roster requires removal of three existing handguns on the roster

9th Circuit used the "two step" approach for Renna which the recent Supreme Court ruling for Bruen eliminated and challenge to Renna could end the CA handgun roster.

 

[CapnMac]

Saw where the magazine ban and AW bans using two0step are being returned to Judge Benitez.
Will be good to see where that heads afterward.

 

[Mark_Mark]

Hope Washington’s mag circus rule gets challenged as well. With the CA pistol roster, it’s dumb. They kept pushing and pushing, until they got pushed back!

Support the SAF !!!

 

[F-111 John]

Saw where the magazine ban and AW bans using two0step are being returned to Judge Benitez.
Will be good to see where that heads afterward.

Were they being returned to Judge Benitez who originally ruled the laws unconstitutional, or are they being returned to the en banc 9th circuit who overturned Benitez?

 

[4v50 Gary]

This would be good.

 

[Riomouse911]

That roster of “safe” is a total farce. It has been, since day one, a slow attempt to ultimately ban handgun sales in the State.

If you look, you will see that every gun on it expires on Jan 1, 2023. I guess that day will now institute a total prohibition on new handgun sales in Ca?

Get rid of this phony law please, 9th and/or USSC!

Stay safe.

 

[LiveLife]

Saw where the magazine ban and AW bans using [two-step] are being returned to Judge Benitez.

Were they being returned to Judge Benitez who originally ruled the laws unconstitutional, or are they being returned to the ... 9th?

Renna v Bonta deals with CA Handgun Roster and since 9th Circuit ruled using the two step approach, any challenge would reverse the ruling post Supreme Court Bruen ruling.

Renna v Bonta ... 9th Circuit used the "two step" approach ... which the recent Supreme Court ruling for Bruen eliminated

Miller v Bonta (CA assault weapon ban) and affecting Rupp v Bonta (CA ban on certain assault weapon) was stayed at the 9th Circuit but a motion was filed to lift the stay due to Bruen ruling - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...r-aw-magazine-ban.905531/page-6#post-12343098

If/once stay is lifted, then CA assault weapons ban would effectively end (No more featureless rifles, no more registered "Assault Weapons") as judge Benitez ruling in Miller was quite clear that modern rifles in common use that use magazines are protected by the 2A. With Bruen ruling eliminating the two step approach, I believe stay being lifted is likely - https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.n...2850515/Miller_v_Bonta_Opinion.pdf?1622850515


Duncan v Bonta was reviewed by the Supreme Court and put on hold pending Bruen but was remanded back to 9th Circuit after the ruling. Judge Benitez was also quite clear in Duncan ruling and confirmed Caetano v Mass ruling that magazines are "arms" protected by 2A and normal capacity magazines could be cruicial to gun owners defend themselves without the "lethal pause" 10 round magazines may cause under gunfighting situations.

Like Duncan, ANJRPC v Grewal, (NJ magazine ban case) and Bianchi v Frosh (MD assault weapon case) were also reviewed by the Supreme Court and put on hold pending Bruen ruling but remanded back down to their respective Circuits along with Young v Hawaii (HI open carry case)
- https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...r-aw-magazine-ban.905531/page-6#post-12339826

 

[BJung]

Hope Washington’s mag circus rule gets challenged as well. With the CA pistol roster, it’s dumb. They kept pushing and pushing, until they got pushed back!

Support the SAF !!!

I think we were lucky to have two new Justices that are not Woke. If they were not there, things would get much worse.

 

[Mark_Mark]

I think we were lucky to have two new Justices that are not Woke. If they were not there, things would get much worse.

You know who to thank! we all do!!!!

 

[illinoisburt]

Don't want to rain on anyone's party but this is not yet a done deal on any of these cases. They look promising however until the cases are actually ruled on and go back through appeals will they potentially come off the books. I would not expect it to be a quick process and if anything the legislature will be quick to try to cook up a replacement.

 

[LiveLife]

Don't want to rain on anyone's party but this is not yet a done deal on any of these cases. They look promising however until the cases are actually ruled on and go back through appeals will they potentially come off the books.

While this thread is about CA handgun roster and Renna v Bonta, elimination of the two step approach used to challenge Renna ruling will have profound affect on other 2A cases.

Some of these cases have exhausted the appeals/en banc reviews and why they were at the Supreme Court level having reviewed and put on hold pending Bruen ruling or stayed at CIrcuit Court level.

Since the Bruen ruling, cases have been remanded back to the Circuit Courts by the Supreme Court to be ruled with the two step approach removed (This is key and now these cases would be ruled unconstitutional at the Circuit Court level to set precedent for the states represented by the Circuit Courts.

Some of the cases were stayed at the Circuit Court level also using the two step approach so any challenge to the case/request to lift the stay would also change the rulings.

And to me, Supreme Court's Bruen ruling made it clear that if these cases are not ruled according to Supreme Court's opinion expressed for Bruen below, Supreme Court would likely rule unconstitutional for the entire country, not just for that particular Circuit Court:

• Two step approach eliminated
• Second Amendment is not a second class right
• Second Amendment protects modern types of arms to include magazine fed semi-auto pistols/carbines/rifles just like First Amendment protects modern forms of communication like email/text.
• Magazine fed semi-auto firearms are "in common use" and are not dangerous
• Expanding on Heller ruling, Second Amendment protects carry outside of home
• May issue states are now shall issue states

 

[Capybara]

All of our ridiculous anti-2A laws here in California will fall. It's just how long it will take to get them either to the local court or up to the 9th. And how long it will take for California to throw in the towel and stop just trying to make new workaround BS laws.

 

[BJung]

All of our ridiculous anti-2A laws here in California will fall. It's just how long it will take to get them either to the local court or up to the 9th. And how long it will take for California to throw in the towel and stop just trying to make new workaround BS laws.

I disagree fellow Californian. Our Liberal Californians will ignore anything that challenges them or continue making laws to limit the 2A. Just listen to NPR and you'll discover how indoctrinated the State is.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

...ignore anything that challenges them or continue making laws to limit the 2A...

This is where I'm at, too. What happens when these cases go back to their original courts, with instructions to apply Bruen standards, and the original courts say "OK, we applied text and history and we still find the laws Constitutional"? Every single case will hve to go all the way back to the Supreme Court. It will take yeaaaaarrrrrrrrs. And then, legislatures will simply write more, but different, gun control laws which will also have to go all the way to the Supreme Court, which will also tae yeaaaaarrrrrrrrs. There just doesn't seem to be a way to compel government to adhere to the Constitution or the Bruen standards.

 

[Capybara]

This is where I'm at, too. What happens when these cases go back to their original courts, with instructions to apply Bruen standards, and the original courts say "OK, we applied text and history and we still find the laws Constitutional"? Every single case will hve to go all the way back to the Supreme Court. It will take yeaaaaarrrrrrrrs. And then, legislatures will simply write more, but different, gun control laws which will also have to go all the way to the Supreme Court, which will also tae yeaaaaarrrrrrrrs. There just doesn't seem to be a way to compel government to adhere to the Constitution or the Bruen standards.

I think if we had a pro 2A President and controlled both houses, the Feds could compel the tyrants in Sacramento to comply with the Constitution by withholding federal funding. I think that is the only way it will ever stop.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

...Feds could compel the tyrants in Sacramento to comply with the Constitution by withholding federal funding...

I don't think so. The previous administration tried that tactic regarding immigration enforcement, and the Supreme Court shot it down. (Admittedly, that was a different Supreme Court, but I would expect a similar outcome today; the president has to be the president of every state and of all the people-not just the 53% who support him.)

I just don't see any mechanism in the Constitution to enforce a Supreme Court order, if a local government is determined to ignore it. In fact, the power to declare a law unconstitutional isn't even in the Constitution; that power is a by-product of the Marbury v Madison case.

At best, we can look to the precedents set by the Eisenhower and Kennedy administrations during the integration and Civil Rights days. Is any president going to send in United States Marshalls and the 82nd Airborne to physically remove Democratic governors, legislators, and mayors? I doubt it. The previous administration wouldn't even do it when half the nation was ablaze.

 

[Handshaker]

That roster of “safe” is a total farce. It has been, since day one, a slow attempt to ultimately ban handgun sales in the State.

If you look, you will see that every gun on it expires on Jan 1, 2023. I guess that day will now institute a total prohibition on new handgun sales in Ca?

Get rid of this phony law please, 9th and/or USSC!

Stay safe.

Total prohibition unless your a politician, they will always have theirs even if no one else does, which is the whole plan. I can see the horse and rider now, The Libtardz are coming, the Libtardz are coming...

 

[stillquietvoice]

All of our ridiculous anti-2A laws here in California will fall. It's just how long it will take to get them either to the local court or up to the 9th. And how long it will take for California to throw in the towel and stop just trying to make new workaround BS laws.

Will likely take a long time for that, much like NY's walk arround laws. Liberals won't stop on their own, might try federal prosecution for civil rights violations to end 2a encroachments. Short of that won't sink in.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

Will likely take a long time for that, much like NY's walk arround laws. Liberals won't stop on their own, might try federal prosecution for civil rights violations to end 2a encroachments. Short of that won't sink in.

You know. That's a good idea. If nothing else, it would help to cement the argument that the 2nd Amendment is a civil right and not a "disfavored" or 2nd class right. I think it would lend legitimacy to the cause for those who are not solidly in one camp or the other. (Of which, I think there are like 5 members in the whole country; they meet at Denny's on Tuesday mornings for coffee.)

 

[BJung]

There won't be much to return to if Liberals get their way because they would have totally destroyed anything from the past to salvage. A good book I read was The Righteous Mind. The author started as a Left Leaning Liberal but after his research discovered that Conservatives have a plan of what is expected of everyone. The Left does not. The 2A is a Civil Right and cannot be removed just as the State can't legislate to decide if you were going to be part of genocide or not. Yet, I believe, if they can get all our guns, they'd hunt us down and kill us to remove the threat. Never give them the chance. A note of history worth researching is the French Huguenots. As I recall, the State convinced the Huguenots to disarm and after disarming them, the leaders were massacred, and the rest lost their rights. Our Founding fathers were aware of this incident. This is one reason why 2A exists. Order a simple book on the 2A or (if you are really lazy) watch Youtube on the 2A. I made my daughter read a book on it so the Mass Media and Liberals won't misinform her.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

A note of history worth researching is the French Huguenots. As I recall, the State convinced the Huguenots to disarm and after disarming them, the leaders were massacred, and the rest lost their rights.

WOW!!!! I never thought I'd read someone posting about the Hugenots on social media!!

Your story is correct, and as I recall the story, the massacre happened at a wedding of a prominent Huegenot (French Protestants) when all of the other leaders would be there. This after a promise of peace from the French crown.

The survivors were attacked in a port town sometime later. The survivors of that attack made their way to what is modern day Jacksonville, FL where many of them were captured by the Spanish from St. Augustine, taken to the island of Matanzas in the middle of the St. John's River and all but two (who claimed to be Catholic) executed.

ETA: To keep this 2A/Firearm/THR focused, the totality of this story illustrates that
1.) government promises aren't reliable
2.) minority groups are at the most risk of government persecution and state violence
3.) the 2A stands as a last ditch check on an abusive government
4.) government abuse can come from any quarter

PS: History is full of these stories.

 

[LiveLife]

1.) government promises aren't reliable
2.) minority groups are at the most risk of government persecution and state violence
3.) the 2A stands as a last ditch check on an abusive government
4.) government abuse can come from any quarter

Correct and well explained by justice Gorsuch on this post - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...fornia-ammo-restriction.907903/#post-12362753

 

[BJung]

Correct and well explained by justice Gorsuch on this post - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...fornia-ammo-restriction.907903/#post-12362753

To add, California promised current owners of SKS rifles with detachable magazines that they could keep their firearm with a grandfather clause iff they registered their SKS rifles with the State. Many owners did so. And, a shortly afterwards, Sacramento changed the law and banned those guns AND had a list of the owners. The lesson is, never trust these Liberals.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

To add, California promised current owners of SKS rifles with detachable magazines that they could keep their firearm with a grandfather clause iff they registered their SKS rifles with the State. Many owners did so. And, a shortly afterwards, Sacramento changed the law and banned those guns AND had a list of the owners. The lesson is, never trust these Liberals.

If you like your gun, you can keep your gun.

On a more serious note, that has always been the fear. TBH, I'm surprised they never went after pre 1986 NFA guns in any meaningful way. That as actually been the counter to the fear of registries-at least in the US. A lot of people registered their full autos in 86 and they now have very valuable, fully transferrable guns. Those who didn't trust the government and refused to register them have blocks of rusting metal that can never again see the light of day.

 

[Handshaker]

If you like your gun, you can keep your gun.

Those who didn't trust the government and refused to register them have blocks of rusting metal that can never again see the light of day.

Unless they move out of state. Calif had a negative population growth for the last couple of years, even though there many are pouring over the border. I am sure the liberals don't care, they probably think, Let 'em go, then only sheep are left..