SAF Amicus in YUKUTAKE (HI) - 2A -always- loses at the 9th

[Librarian]

https://saf.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Yukutake-Amicus-Filed.pdf

Kind of need to be a law-nerd to read the whole thing, but if that's you, worth it!

 

[Warpspeed]

Ohhhhhh SNAP!

 

[H. Bowman]

No summary?

 

[Librarian]

No summary?

Clicking a link is hard ...

But Amici are compelled to make their voice heard because, as they are
frequent litigants in this Court, they too have had hard-won and costly Second
Amendment victories stripped away from them upon en banc rehearing. For most
other types of litigants in the Ninth Circuit, en banc rehearing is statistically almost as
rare as a Supreme Court cert grant, and prevailing parties after a three-judge panel
almost always keep their victories. But rehearing is practically a matter of course in
this Court whenever litigants challenging gun laws prevail on final judgment before a
three-judge panel. With only one very recent exception in which en banc did not
occur because the state of California did not petition for rehearing, 2 every appellate
victory for the Second Amendment has been reversed en banc.

 

[Batman]

ARGUMENT ............................................................................................................................ 3
I. THIS COURT’S PRACTICE OF CONSTANTLY GRANTING EN BANCREHEARING WHENEVER SECOND AMENDMENT LITIGANTS PREVAILIS DETRIMENTAL TO INSTITUTIONAL TRUST ............................................................. 3
II. THIS COURT SHOULD USE THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVERSE THEERRONEOUS INTEREST-BALANCING STANDARD SET FORTH IN B&LPRODUCTIONS, INC. V. NEWSOM ................................................................................ 13
A. HOW B&L PRODUCTIONS WRONGLY REVIVED INTERESTBALANCING IN THE NINTH CIRCUIT ................................................................... 13
B. B&L PRODUCTIONS MISUNDERSTOOD THE PLAIN TEXT ANALYSISOF BRUEN ................................................................................................................ 16
C. HAWAII REVISED STATUTES §§ 134-2(E) AND 134-3 IMPLICATETHE PLAIN TEXT OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT AND LACK ANYDISTINCTLY SIMILAR SUPPORTING HISTORICAL TRADITION ............................ 19
CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................... 21