Legal Duncan v. Bonta (and 8 new 2A cases) and the SCOTUS conference of 6 March 2026

[GoldensRule]

It's virtually impossible to make predictions about which cases will or will not be considered by SCOTUS. However, when cases are pushed back instead of being denied certiorari, that is an indication that there is a degree of interest among the some of the justices, this is the case with Duncan v. Bonta.

It has once again been distributed for the next conference of 3/6/2026, along with 142 other cases.

Within the last week (or so) eight new certiorari petitions have been submitted to the court pertaining to 2A issues. "The new cases include challenges to (1) the federal felon-in-possession ban; (2) the constitutionality of state laws that permit suits against members of the firearms industry, purportedly in contravention of PLCAA; (3) Illinois’ open carry ban; and (4) a local ordinance in Oregon that restricts public carry but allows for the affirmative defense of possessing a concealed carry license."

You can read about all the 2nd amendment issues pending before the court here: https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/2026/02/scotus-gun-watch-2-27-2026

 

[treelogger]

It's virtually impossible to make predictions about which cases will or will not be considered by SCOTUS.

True.

However, when cases are pushed back instead of being denied certiorari, that is an indication that there is a degree of interest among the some of the justices, ...

Or it is an indication that there are a lot of cases on the docket that they consider much more urgent, and that are taking up all the time. There is only 9 justices, plus about 40 clerks (staff attorneys). Many of the cases they get are very complex, and very important.

To me, what it points out is that the US legal system is partially broken, with our constitutional court not doing what it needs to do. If you scale the size of the court of ultimate jurisdiction from other first-world countries to the number of cases in the US, I think you find out that SCOTUS should have about 100 to 200 justices, probably organized into roughly a dozen "chambers" or "senates", probably with some of those specialized to certain fields. Similarly, the federal appeals courts have very long wait times to get opinions out (again, because judges are overloaded), and state courts can take a year to hear a civil case. A week ago I was in a session in a California superior court, where the judge had 17 motions to decide, plus three small trials to hear (each of the three with 50 to 100 pages of documents filed), and they had half an hour to do all of that (since the court room was needed for another judge at 9am, and our judge also had another previously scheduled hearing at the same time). Obviously, nearly all the cases were deferred by between one and three months.

I don't think the delay in Duncan allows us to make any prediction, neither optimistic nor pessimistic.

 

[GoldensRule]

True.


Or it is an indication that there are a lot of cases on the docket that they consider much more urgent, and that are taking up all the time. There is only 9 justices, plus about 40 clerks (staff attorneys). Many of the cases they get are very complex, and very important.

To me, what it points out is that the US legal system is partially broken, with our constitutional court not doing what it needs to do. If you scale the size of the court of ultimate jurisdiction from other first-world countries to the number of cases in the US, I think you find out that SCOTUS should have about 100 to 200 justices, probably organized into roughly a dozen "chambers" or "senates", probably with some of those specialized to certain fields. Similarly, the federal appeals courts have very long wait times to get opinions out (again, because judges are overloaded), and state courts can take a year to hear a civil case. A week ago I was in a session in a California superior court, where the judge had 17 motions to decide, plus three small trials to hear (each of the three with 50 to 100 pages of documents filed), and they had half an hour to do all of that (since the court room was needed for another judge at 9am, and our judge also had another previously scheduled hearing at the same time). Obviously, nearly all the cases were deferred by between one and three months.

I don't think the delay in Duncan allows us to make any prediction, neither optimistic nor pessimistic.

Well, I add a 10% measure of optimism simply because the case has not yet been denied certiorari. I agree, we need many more SCOTUS justices, term limited with a rotating chief justice. Since I am expressing wishes, we also need many more circuit courts of appeal and on a different note, we need many more congressional representatives. None of these things has kept pace with the growth of the nation.

 

[shroom]

Scotus cases being important is subjective. 2A rights for non violent felons, 2A for weed smokers, 2A for under 21's... like ok theoretically I support those things I guess. In actuality doesn't impact me at all and really I don't give a damn whatever they rule/don't rule.