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

[HibikiR]

Since its chronological order places it before Duncan, it can potentially set the precedent that affects how Duncan plays out.

 

[DB>)>]

SCOTUS could potentially touch on MANY issues - what is and isn't an "arm" (since this shenannigan has been floating around), what limits can be placed on arms if any (can I own a personal A-10?), can arbitrary limits be placed on features, capacity, what if any authorities can place limits on their jurisdiction vs. a national policy (Bill of Rights).

In theory the court should have a very serious interest in setting boundaries and guardrails that cannot be easily bypassed by the gun grabbing brigade, as the issues keep coming up and the local legislatures and courts keep making nonsense restrictions that take enormous resources to reverse.

This may be the bst hope to restore the 2A we will see in our lifetimes... hope springs eternal...

 

[AR15barrels]

So this will affect the Duncan v Bonta case as well?

I think that the USSC is holding off on Duncan until they resolve Viramontes.
Once Viramontes is resolved, they would likely GVR Duncan with instructions to apply Viramontes.
If you read through the CRPA brief, Chuck/Anna make a huge push for the USSC to accept Duncan and then order the 9th to follow Viramontes directly without pushing the case back down to the lower court a 3rd time.

 

[Dvrjon]

So this will affect the Duncan v Bonta case as well?

The direct impact being pled is in the brief:

The Second Amendment protects a functioning Arm, not merely an object that resembles one.

That principal has immediate consequences for not just Viramontes and Grant, but also Duncan v. Bonta, where the Ninth Circuit has held that standard-capacity magazines are mere “accessories” or “accoutrements” unrelated to the protected arm. If AR-15s and similar semiautomatic rifles are protected, the magazines they are designed to use cannot be constitutionally severed from them. The question is not whether a magazine, considered in isolation, independently qualifies as an “Arm.” It is whether the government may prohibit an ordinary means of possessing and using an Arm that the Second Amendment protects.

 

[exnds]

Now the question is will they per curiam Duncan or GVR it.

 

[AR15barrels]

Now the question is will they per curiam Duncan or GVR it.

Hope for the former but expect the latter...