TROUBLE LOGGING IN? GO HERE

TROUBLE LOGGING IN? GO HERE




NEW HERE? Check our DIRECTORY FIRST

Author Topic: Huge Win For Gun Owners! Litigation Alert-Ruling in Duncan (Magazine Case)  (Read 1150 times)

Offline CRPA

  • California Rifle and Pistol Association
  • wEB VOLUNTEERS
  • Registered User
  • ****
  • Posts: 137
  • VOLUNTEER TODAY
HUGE WIN IN COURT! NINTH CIRCUIT SIDES WITH CRPA AND OTHER PLAINTIFF GUN OWNERS TO STRIKE DOWN CALIFORNIA MAGAZINE BAN LAW!
 
Today we received the much anticipated ruling in the Duncan v. Becerra case challenging California laws banning the sale or possession of magazines that can hold over ten rounds. This is the same case that brought you "Freedom Week" where hundreds of thousands of Californians were able to lawfully purchase standard capacity magazines just like the rest of the country.

CRPA has been fighting against the laws banning the sale or possession of these standard capacity magazines since we filed this case back in 2017! 

We initially won through a great ruling by the United States District Court in San Diego, but the State quickly appealed and Judge Benitez was forced to stay his ruling to allow the purchase of magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition until the appeal was made to the Ninth Circuit. We quickly answered the State's appeal and presented our oral arguments.

We continued to fight these useless infringements on our right to self-defense because California’s attempt to prohibit law-abiding citizens from manufacturing, obtaining, selling, transferring, or even possessing standard-issue magazines for firearms that are typically possessed for self-defense violates the Constitution. Plain and simple. We knew it and so did the state.

"Today, after years of fighting and years of support for this case from members like you, the Court decided in favor of plaintiffs' and upheld our challenge  against the state's ban on standard capacity magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. This is a huge win!" said Chuck Michel, CRPA President and General Counsel.

Significantly, the court held that the state's efforts to ban these magazines does not pass the strict scrutiny or intermediate scrutiny tests and the magazine bans create a heavy burden on the Second Amendment rights of Californians. 

There are many more battles to come, but CRPA stands ready. We are analyzing the court opinion now and will have more information on what this ruling means for California gun owners and what the next steps we anticipate the state will take in this case. Watch for more information on crpa.org soon.

Only through your continued support in helping us fight these unjust laws can we continue to defend the Second Amendment and hold the line for lawful gun owners in our state. We also thank the NRA for their support over the life of this case.

To contribute to cases like that that secure your rights click here.

 
 
Donate to the Litigation Victory Fund To Support Wins Like This!
 

Stay engaged in the fight to keep and bear arms!

Facebook
Twitter
Link
Website
 
Copyright © 2020 California Rifle & Pistol Association, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at our website: crpa.org, you are a member of CRPA, or you are a Second Amendment supporter in California.

Our mailing address is:
California Rifle & Pistol Association
271 E. Imperial Hwy, Ste 620
Fullerton, CA 92835-1049
« Last Edit: August 14, 2020, 11:46:38 AM by < »
Supporting the Second Amendment and shooting sports since 1875. Every dollar CRPA receives stays in California to fight for your Second Amendment and hunting rights. Fighting on the FRONT LINES in California - GET INVOLVED, JOIN or RENEW TODAY

Offline .

  • Global Moderator
  • Registered User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1280
  • Forum Administrator
« Last Edit: August 14, 2020, 12:27:52 PM by < »
Encouraging the development of the characteristics of honesty, good fellowship, self-discipline, team play and self-reliance as essentials of good sportsmanship.

Offline CRPA

  • California Rifle and Pistol Association
  • wEB VOLUNTEERS
  • Registered User
  • ****
  • Posts: 137
  • VOLUNTEER TODAY
Chuck Michel summary Duncan (Magazine Case)
« Reply #2 on: August 14, 2020, 12:54:51 PM »
HUGE HUGE WIN - DUNCAN CASE RULING -- HERE IS A SUMMARY:

Quote
The panel affirmed the district court’s summary judgment in favor of plaintiffs challenging California Government Code § 31310, which bans possession of large-capacity magazines (“LCMs”) that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition; and held that the ban violated the Second Amendment.

The Ninth Circuit employs a two-prong inquiry to determine whether firearm regulations violate the Second Amendment: (1) whether the law burdens conduct protected by the Second Amendment; and (2) if so, what level of scrutiny to apply to the regulation. United states v. Chovan, 735 F.3d 1127, 1136 (9th Cir. 2013)

The panel held that under the first prong of the test, Cal. Penal Code § 32310 burdened protected conduct. First, the panel held that firearm magazines are protected arms under the Second Amendment. Second, the panel held that LCMs are commonly owned and typically used for lawful purposes, and are not “unusual arms” that would fall outside the scope of the Second Amendment. Third, the panel held that LCM prohibitions are not longstanding regulations and do not enjoy a presumption of lawfulness. Fourth, the panel held that there was no persuasive historical evidence in the record showing LCM possession fell outside the ambit of Second Amendment protection.

Proceeding to prong two of the inquiry, the panel held that strict scrutiny was the appropriate standard to apply. First, the panel held that Cal. Penal Code § 32310 struck at the core right of law-abiding citizens to self-defend by banning LCM possession within the home. Second, the panel held that Section 32310’s near-categorical ban of LCMs substantially burdened core Second Amendment rights. Third, the panel held that decisions in other circuits were distinguishable. Fourth, the panel held that this circuit’s decision in Fyock v. City of Sunnyvale, 779 F.3d 991 (9th Cir. 2015), did not obligate the panel to apply intermediate scrutiny.

The panel held that Cal. Penal Code § 32310 did not survive strict scrutiny review. First, the panel held that the state interests advanced here were compelling: preventing and mitigating gun violence. Second, the panel held that Section 32310 was not narrowly tailored to achieve the compelling state interests it purported to serve because the state’s chosen method – a statewide blanket ban on possession everywhere and for nearly everyone – was not the least restrictive means of achieving the compelling interests.

The panel held that even if intermediate scrutiny were to apply, Cal. Penal Code § 32310 would still fail. The panel held that while the interests expressed by the state qualified as “important,” the means chosen to advance those interests were not substantially related to their service.

Chief District Judge Lynn dissented, and would reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment. Judge Lynn wrote that the majority opinion conflicted with this Circuit’s precedent in Fyock, and with decisions in all the six sister Circuits that addressed the Second Amendment issue presented here. Judge Lynn would hold that intermediate scrutiny applies, and Cal. Penal Code § 32310 satisfies that standard.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2020, 11:42:13 AM by < »
Supporting the Second Amendment and shooting sports since 1875. Every dollar CRPA receives stays in California to fight for your Second Amendment and hunting rights. Fighting on the FRONT LINES in California - GET INVOLVED, JOIN or RENEW TODAY

Offline davewatson

  • Full Member
  • Registered User
  • ***
  • Posts: 7
Thanks, Chuck - we love you.

To all -- These cases are winnable, but they're incredibly expensive. Hopefully all of us will contribute what we can to this very worthy and effective cause.

Offline CRPA

  • California Rifle and Pistol Association
  • wEB VOLUNTEERS
  • Registered User
  • ****
  • Posts: 137
  • VOLUNTEER TODAY
UPDATE: Huge Win For Gun Owners! Litigation Alert-Ruling in Duncan
« Reply #4 on: August 17, 2020, 04:38:28 PM »
ANSWERS TO FAQ
About the Ninth Circuit’s Decision in  
Duncan v. Becerra “Large Capacity” Magazine Case
 
On August 14, 2020, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit issued its opinion in the CRPA and NRA supported lawsuit Duncan v. Becerra. This historic decision strikes down California’s statewide prohibitions on magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds as unconstitutional. In doing so, the Ninth Circuit upheld the 2019 decision from the United States District Court in San Diego that resulted in hundreds of thousands—if not millions—of magazines being lawfully purchased by California gun owners during what has become known as “Freedom Week.”.

Naturally, many gun owners have questions regarding the impact of the most recent ruling in Duncan, and its effects on gun owners and those who want to sell, buy, or possess magazines that can hold over ten rounds.

To answer the many question that CRPA has been receiving, we have prepared a list of commonly asked questions with answers to assist our members and gun owners.

Click Here To See Full Document
 
Supporting the Second Amendment and shooting sports since 1875. Every dollar CRPA receives stays in California to fight for your Second Amendment and hunting rights. Fighting on the FRONT LINES in California - GET INVOLVED, JOIN or RENEW TODAY

Offline CRPA

  • California Rifle and Pistol Association
  • wEB VOLUNTEERS
  • Registered User
  • ****
  • Posts: 137
  • VOLUNTEER TODAY
update: Litigation Alert-Ruling in Duncan (Magazine Case)
« Reply #5 on: August 29, 2020, 05:24:58 AM »
from Chuck Michel

Quote
The Ninth Circuit has ordered us to file a response to the state's request for en banc review. ON IT.

Docket Text:
Filed order (CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN, KENNETH K. LEE and BARBARA M. G. LYNN): Plaintiffs-Appellees are directed to file a response to the Petition for Rehearing En Banc filed with this court on August 28, 2020. The response shall not exceed fifteen pages or 4,200 words, and shall be filed within 21 days of the date of this order. [11806780] (HH)
Supporting the Second Amendment and shooting sports since 1875. Every dollar CRPA receives stays in California to fight for your Second Amendment and hunting rights. Fighting on the FRONT LINES in California - GET INVOLVED, JOIN or RENEW TODAY

 

West End Gun Club      [SEND MAIL HERE]
P.O. Box 4379
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729



new range address (DO NOT SEND MAIL HERE)
MAPS may be slow to update***
2200 Meyers Canyon Road
San Bernardino, CA 92407
(909) 781-4486  Genl. Info text or leave msg

The club has rented a new office
by appointment ONLY - (DO NOT SEND MAIL HERE)
 7828 Haven Ave
Rancho Cucamonga, CA

Clubhouse Address –CLUB MEETINGS:
1324 E. Fourth Street
Ontario, CA 91764  (DO NOT SEND MAIL HERE)



PRIVACY POLICY





TROUBLE LOGGING IN? GO HERE