DUNCAN V. BONTA GOES TO SCOTUS CONFERENCE - California Large Capacity Magazine Prohibition

[Dvrjon]

Found some extra time and pulled this:

SCOTUS Blog 10/24: https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/10/...sions-concerning-persecution-or-torture-risk/

[…]Hamm v. Smith hit a historic milestone by being relisted for the 23rd time, thus becoming the most-relisted case ever – or at least the most-relisted case in the 15 years I’ve been closely watching relists. […]Hamm unseated the previous relist king, Ryan v. Hurles, which topped out at 22 relists just over 10 years ago.

Also, Hamm bridged two sessions of the Court.

 

[tenemae]

Is it this case? If so, interesting they'd hold it that long before dismissing it.
Given the history of Duncan, I doubt that's where we're going tho

 

[Dvrjon]

Is it this case? If so, interesting they'd hold it that long before dismissing it.
Given the history of Duncan, I doubt that's where we're going tho

I’m not understanding the purpose of this statement.

The question was what is the record for the number of relists before denial of certs.

The answer was succinct and correct, regardless of the reasons for relists before denial. Where we are going with Duncan (currently 19 relists) could easily surpass these numbers.

 

[shroom]

I thought Hamm v Smith was granted cert. Now it looks like the SC changed their minds I guess?

 

[tenemae]

I’m not understanding the purpose of this statement.

Oh, I'm sorry. I was sort of wondering out loud if the outcome of the other series of relists could give us hints as to what's going on with Duncan

 

[exnds]

As I alluded to in an earlier post, I don’t think it has anything to do with the number of relists. It’s just the timing of other rulings that they want before deciding Duncan’s fate. If Duncan happens to break all relist records that’s strictly a side effect.

 

[Dvrjon]

Oh, I'm sorry. I was sort of wondering out loud if the outcome of the other series of relists could give us hints as to what's going on with Duncan

No worries; it was late and I’ve seen this thread walk off a ledge a few times and thought we were heading somewhere. All good.

To your point, I don’t think we can “trend” the court’s actions on relist terminations. For example, in Hamm, the court took over a year to conclude:

The Eleventh Circuit’s opinion is unclear on this point, and this Court’s ultimate assessment of any petition for certiorari by the State may depend on the basis for the Eleventh Circuit’s decision.

. It took a year for them to understand they didn’t understand the appellate court’s opinion. Then, they GVR’d it.
See: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-167_heim.pdf, last paragraph.

 

[Dvrjon]

8 Jun: Orders don’t appear to include Duncan.

 

[Dvrjon]

For those expecting the Wolford case to carry weight in Duncan this term, (Carry on private property), today’s Orders (Case 24-1046) grant submission of a brief from our side After Argument (which was done in Jan ‘26).

The Brief notifies the SCOTUS of two cases (Fourth Circuit; Maryland. Second Circuit; New York) which overturn those state’s Private Property Default Rules as unconstitutional.

This may require additional briefing from the state.

IF the Court was holding Duncan/Gator’s pending a Decision on Wolford (I don’t think so), this may delay finalization.

 

[Dvrjon]

Relisted for 11 June. That’s 20 on the relist list.

 

[pancakes]

Relisted for 11 June.

 

[GeeQ87]

Watch them change it again and use the World Cup as an excuse lol

 

[treelogger]

Nice article on Scotusblog, summarizing the current issues in gun rights, and what is in front of the Supreme Court, as far as AWs and LCMs are concerned:

The Supreme Court and the right to bear arms: an explainer

www.scotusblog.com

 

[Dvrjon]

Groundhog Day.

15 Jun: Orders don’t appear to include Duncan.

 

[treelogger]

I haven't followed the calendar details: When will the current session end? It's usually last week of June, or first week or July, right? So in a nutshell, the two remaining gun cases (Wolford and Hemani I think) will be published within a few weeks. At that point, Duncan should get some for of treatment. This is one of the rare cases where the "two weeks" joke becomes true.

Ah, the days of Iggy and Alison. So much fun. He's been dead for a while, and she just retired.

 

[IrregularDefense]

I haven't followed the calendar details: When will the current session end? It's usually last week of June, or first week or July, right? So in a nutshell, the two remaining gun cases (Wolford and Hemani I think) will be published within a few weeks. At that point, Duncan should get some for of treatment. This is one of the rare cases where the "two weeks" joke becomes true.

Ah, the days of Iggy and Alison. So much fun. He's been dead for a while, and she just retired.

Last day is 25 June

 

[Dvrjon]

Relisted for conference on 18 June.

This is listing 21.

 

[Dvrjon]

I haven't followed the calendar details: When will the current session end? It's usually last week of June, or first week or July, right? So in a nutshell, the two remaining gun cases (Wolford and Hemani I think) will be published within a few weeks. At that point, Duncan should get some for of treatment. This is one of the rare cases where the "two weeks" joke becomes true.

Ah, the days of Iggy and Alison. So much fun. He's been dead for a while, and she just retired.

As noted, the 25th is a split Decision/conference day and is the final day. They also have a split session on 18 June. (The 19th is a Friday holiday).

They can issue orders or decisions on any day, but usually not on a holiday.

The Court has a history of holding major case decisions until the last throes of the session in late June:
Dobbs: 24 Jun
Heller: 26 Jun
MacDonald: 28 Jun
Rahimi: 21 Jun.

 

[Dvrjon]

I’m still not seeing traction for either Wolford or Hemani to provide results which directly affect Duncan. The Court likes tightly-defined decisions, and it will take some mental gymnastics to apply the results of these to Duncan. Plus, GVRing Duncan a third time makes the court look indecisive.

Wolford turns on the “where” issue and is focused on carry on private property open to the public. The most we can expect here is to kill the notion that this is a property rights issue and also to disregard the unconstitutional “Black Laws” which the state has used to push this case.

Hemani hinges on the “who” issue and is focused on colonial times’ “habitual drunkard” being analogous to a user of a controlled substance.

Duncan, is a “what” can be carried issue and locks into the definition of an arm/accessory and broad historical analogies of powder magazines which don’t bear on the other cases.

I’m expecting them to hold Duncan and Gator’s through the Summer to see what percolates up and gives them a cleaner look at the hardware cases coming through.

That’s my “Glass half-full” view.

 

[Dvrjon]

Ah, the days of Iggy and Alison. So much fun. He's been dead for a while, and she just retired.

Somewhere, I’ve got copies of emails between Alison Merrilees and one of the Brady bunch. The Brady gun was reaching out to make Merrilees aware of the “gun nuts” on CalGuns and some of the strategies being discussed. She told him DOJ monitored that site regularly and it was sometimes helpful to know their next steps. Mostly, it was not complimentary towards the group.