9th circuit rules may issue unconstitutional in Peruta

[RANDYT]

The 9th CA has ruled that may issue is unconstitutional. they will have to issue permits without just cause

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...tive-rule-against-licensed-carry-of-handguns/

 

[bigtoe416]

Congrats!

 

[amaixner]

That's huge.
More analysis from Volkoh:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-ninth-circuits-right-to-carry-a-gun-opinion/

 

[MAC702]

Wow. This is huge. I'm hoping non-resident permits will follow suit. I might be able to visit CA again.

I'm no fan of requiring permits, but will take advantage of it and let people know why I came back to support their economy again.

 

[slapmonkay]

Additional from BrearingArms.com

http://bearingarms.com/breaking-cal...rules-affirms-second-amendment-right-to-bear/

The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Peruta v. San Diego, released minutes ago, affirms the right of law-abiding citizens to carry handguns for lawful protection in public.

California law has a process for applying for a permit to carry a handgun for protection in public, with requirements for safety training, a background check, and so on. These requirements were not challenged. The statute also requires that the applicant have “good cause,” which was interpreted by San Diego County to mean that the applicant is faced with current specific threats. (Not all California counties have this narrow interpretation.) The Ninth Circuit, in a 2-1 opinion written by Judge O’Scannlain, ruled that Peruta was entitled to Summary Judgement, because the “good cause” provision violates the Second Amendment.

The Court ruled that a government may specify what mode of carrying to allow (open or concealed), but a government may not make it impossible for the vast majority of Californians to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.

 

[color of law]

You could not say it any stronger.....

We are well aware that, in the judgment of many governments, the safest sort of firearm-carrying regime is one which restricts the privilege to law enforcement with only narrow exceptions. Nonetheless, “the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. . . . Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court [or ours] to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.” Id. at 636. Nor may we relegate the bearing of arms to a “second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees that we have held to be incorporated into the Due Process Clause.” McDonald, 130 S. Ct. at 3044.

 

[teddyearp]

Also posted here by one of the Plaintiffs:

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?120294-Peruta-v-San-Diego&p=2035235

Yay!

 

[onus]

I just read this online. is this for real ? I am shocked !!! honestly, I don't believe it

 

[davidmcbeth]

As I said before, the 9th is a good venue for gun law now...why? Seems goofy? Yup. Beats me.

 

[CT Barfly]

As I said before, the 9th is a good venue for gun law now...why? Seems goofy? Yup. Beats me.

It's because their justices respect the decisions of the SCOTUS. Guys like Dick Posner (7th) understand how precedent works and are smart enough to provide proper justification/analysis if they intend to contravene a decision of the SCOTUS...which they would really take pains to not do. The quality of the justices in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th just isn't there, and this decision plainly highlights their failings on this issue.

 

[onus]

lets not get too optimistic. the 9th cir is the most overruled circuit in America.

we can be assured this case is now going to SCOTUS

 

[BB62]

We are well aware that, in the judgment of many governments, the safest sort of firearm-carrying regime is one which restricts the privilege to law enforcement with only narrow exceptions. Nonetheless, “the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. . . . Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court [or ours] to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.” Id. at 636. Nor may we relegate the bearing of arms to a “second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees that we have held to be incorporated into the Due Process Clause.” McDonald, 130 S. Ct. at 3044

My personal security detail didn't show up today. If anyone sees them, let me know.

Also, did the court simultaneously overturn their ruling the the police owe a duty to no single individual??

 

[We-the-People]

lets not get too optimistic. the 9th cir is the most overruled circuit in America.

we can be assured this case is now going to SCOTUS

This one will be hard to overturn at SCOTUS considering that they've used SCOTUS to make the decision. I haven't read the entire decision yet, just saw it and have read blurbs, so there may be a "poison pill" in there somewhere but I doubt the entirety of the decision could REASONABLY be overturned. Then again the current SCOTUS did come down with Obamacare being constitutional by first calling it a penalty (to gain standing/jurisdiction) and then a tax (in order to find it within the tax authority of Congress)....while ignoring the fact that courts aren't allowed to rewrite laws.

So.....who knows what they might do with their current makeup.

 

[MKEgal]

lets not get too optimistic. the 9th cir is the most overruled circuit in America.
we can be assured this case is now going to SCOTUS

I think they're often overruled because they're often wrong.

some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security

Did anyone else LOL at that notion?
I wonder why the Court didn't address that with a few references to the various court cases which have said that LEO aren't responsible to keep anyone safe who's not in custody (or rather, that they don't have a special relationship with, however that's defined).

 

[CT Barfly]

The County's argument, as outlined in the dissent included:

"Protecting police officers and ensuring their practical monopoly on
armed force in public."

Uhm...that's pretty far from what the founding fathers would have wanted.

 

[Firearms Iinstuctor]

If you are in CA and HI it is time to apply for your permit before a appeal or a stay pending appeal. Right now one could have a very good case if one is denied.

Flood the issuing agencies with applications the ruling went into effect as soon as it was issued.

 

[BB62]

I don't believe that court, "the court," was the Ninth Circus. Peruta has not yet reached the level of the court denying individual duty.

I didn't say it was. The quoted section came from the USSC McDonald case.

 

[Grapeshot]

Fantastic decision - jubilation. Believe the verdict will hold up.

This will send shock waves through Hawaii, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut..........

The anti are suffering from acute indigestion, I suspect.

 

[CT Barfly]

lets not get too optimistic. the 9th cir is the most overruled circuit in America.

we can be assured this case is now going to SCOTUS

The problem here is that this may be part of the endgame. The SCOTUS already refused to hear Woolard on the same question, despite an existing split. The SCOTUS can also see that the 9th and 7th have extended their decisions in the "right direction" and therefore conclude that there's no more need to grant cert on them. This is bad for folks in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th because those decisions are currently mandatory precedent.

May issue states: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island...not all are "good cause" may issue.

RI and MA are in the 1st Circuit...so they're the last Circuits that could be used to deepen the split by generating a case worthy of certiorari. RI requires "good cause." MA sometimes does, depending on local chief.

The rest are in the 9th, 2nd, 3rd, 4th...all Circuits that have weighed in on this.

Opportunities to take "good cause" to SCOTUS are disappearing. The endgame may indeed be to preserve a split and water down the 2A.

 

[Firearms Iinstuctor]

Fantastic decision - jubilation. Believe the verdict will hold up.

This will send shock waves through Hawaii, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut..........

The anti are suffering from acute indigestion, I suspect.

Only trouble is that the east coast circuits have rules just the opposite only CA and HI are really effected by this.