California "Magazine Ban" Update, Duncan v. Bonta
Summary
TLDRIn this Copper Jacket TV episode, the focus is on the Duncan v. Bon case, a significant legal challenge to California's ban on magazines holding over 10 rounds. The case, currently before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, was paused awaiting the Supreme Court's decision in another case, Rahimi. The host discusses the implications of a recent unfavorable ruling in a related case, Bian v. Brown, which could influence the Duncan outcome. The video also promotes the game 'Rage Shadow Legends,' offering viewers a special promotion and inviting them to join the host's clan.
Takeaways
- 📚 The video discusses the Duncan v. Bon case, which challenges California's ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds.
- 🏛️ The case is currently before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which had previously placed it on hold pending a Supreme Court decision in a related case.
- 🚫 The video shares disappointing news for those following the case, indicating a negative development in the legal fight against the magazine ban.
- 👥 The host encourages viewers to share the update with others interested in the magazine ban case and to engage in the discussion through comments and likes.
- 🎮 The video is sponsored by the game 'Rage Shadow Legends', which is described as a turn-based battle game with an immersive world and special promotions.
- 📈 The case has been significant for California, leading to 'Freedom Week' where residents could purchase firearms and magazines without the usual restrictions.
- 🤔 The video speculates on the impact of a poor decision in a related case (Bian v. Brown) on the Duncan v. Bon case, suggesting that the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling could be used to uphold the ban.
- 📜 The California Department of Justice has sent a letter to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, citing the Bian v. Brown decision as a reason to uphold California's ban.
- 💡 The plaintiffs' attorneys have rebutted the state's argument, pointing out that the Fourth Circuit's decision contradicts the Supreme Court's guidance in the Bruen case.
- ⏰ The host anticipates a decision in the Duncan v. Bon case soon and promises to update viewers, emphasizing the importance of the case for Californians' rights.
Q & A
What is the main topic of the video?
-The main topic of the video is the Duncan v. Bon case, which challenges California's ban on magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds.
Why is the Duncan v. Bon case significant?
-The case is significant because it challenges a state law restricting firearm accessories, and its outcome could impact gun rights in California.
What is the current status of the Duncan v. Bon case?
-As of the video, the case is before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the decision is pending.
How does the outcome of the Bian V. Brown case relate to Duncan v. Bon?
-The Bian V. Brown case, which upheld Maryland's ban on so-called assault weapons, is used by the California Department of Justice to argue that California's magazine ban should also be upheld, potentially influencing the Ninth Circuit's decision in Duncan v. Bon.
What was the impact of the Bian V. Brown decision on the Second Amendment?
-The Bian V. Brown decision suggests that firearms not considered good for personal self-defense may not be protected by the Second Amendment, which could have broader implications for gun rights cases.
What is the 'Freedom Week' mentioned in the video?
-Freedom Week was a period in California when, due to a court decision, people could purchase firearms and accessories without restrictions, including magazines with capacities over 10 rounds.
Why did the California Department of Justice write to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals?
-The California Department of Justice wrote to the court to highlight the Bian V. Brown decision as a reason to uphold California's ban on large-capacity magazines.
What is the concern about the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals' potential decision in Duncan v. Bon?
-The concern is that the court may use the Bian V. Brown decision as a precedent to uphold California's ban, despite the potential issues with the Fourth Circuit's ruling in that case.
What is the role of the Supreme Court's Bruen decision in this context?
-The Bruen decision set a framework for evaluating Second Amendment rights, and the video discusses how lower courts, like the Fourth Circuit, may be misinterpreting or not following this framework.
What does the plaintiff's rebuttal to the California Department of Justice's letter argue?
-The plaintiff's rebuttal argues that the Bian V. Brown decision is flawed and should not be used to uphold California's ban, as it misapplies the Supreme Court's directives from Bruen.
Outlines
📚 Duncan vbon Case Discussion
The video discusses the Duncan vbon case, a significant legal challenge to California's ban on gun magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds. The case is currently under review by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The host explains that the case was previously on hold pending the Supreme Court's decision in another case, rahimi, but now the decision has been made, leading to renewed interest in the outcome of Duncan vbon. The host also mentions that the case is important because it could affect the rights of Californians to choose their firearms and accessories.
📜 Impact of Bian V. Brown on Duncan vbon
The video delves into the implications of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals' decision in Bian V. Brown, which upheld Maryland's ban on so-called assault weapons. The host expresses concern that this decision could negatively influence the outcome of the Duncan vbon case. The California Department of Justice has submitted a letter to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, drawing parallels between the two cases and arguing that California's ban should be upheld based on the Bian V. Brown ruling. The host reads from the letter, which argues that the firearms in question are not within the scope of the Second Amendment right to bear arms for self-defense and that even if they were, the ban would still be constitutional due to a strong tradition of regulating dangerous weapons. The host also mentions a rebuttal from the plaintiff's attorneys, which criticizes the Bian V. Brown decision and argues that it contradicts the Supreme Court's guidance in Bruen.
🔍 Anticipating a Decision in Duncan vbon
In the final paragraph, the host anticipates that a decision in the Duncan vbon case will be forthcoming soon and expresses a desire for Californians to have the freedom to choose their firearms without restrictions. The host encourages viewers to subscribe for updates and reiterates the importance of the case for the rights of California gun owners. The video concludes with a call to action for viewers to stay informed about the case's developments and to support the plaintiffs' efforts to challenge the magazine ban.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Duncan vbon
💡Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
💡Magazine ban
💡Rahimi
💡Second Amendment
💡Plaintiff
💡California Department of Justice
💡Bian V Brown
💡Public safety
💡Rage Shadow Legends
Highlights
Introduction to the Duncan v. Bon case, a significant legal challenge to California's ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds.
Case is currently before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, following a hold pending the Supreme Court's decision in another case, Rahimi.
Discussion on the implications of the recent Supreme Court decision on the Duncan case.
Mention of the impact of the Duncan case on California's 'Freedom Week', a period allowing unrestricted firearm purchases.
Judge Roger T. Benitez's role in declaring California's ban unconstitutional and the subsequent 'Freedom Week'.
Personal anecdote from the host about living in California during 'Freedom Week'.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals' decision in Bian v. Brown, which upheld Maryland's assault weapons ban.
Critique of the Fourth Circuit's reasoning in Bian v. Brown, which is seen as contradicting the Second Amendment.
California Department of Justice's letter to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, citing Bian v. Brown to support California's ban.
Analysis of the California Department of Justice's argument that the ban on large-capacity magazines is constitutional.
Rebuttal from the plaintiff's attorneys challenging the Fourth Circuit's decision and its applicability to Duncan v. Bon.
Concerns that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals may use the Fourth Circuit's decision to uphold California's ban.
Discussion on the potential near-term decision in the Duncan case and its broader implications for gun rights in California.
Call to action for viewers to subscribe for updates on the Duncan case and other related legal developments.
Final thoughts on the importance of the right to choose firearms in California and the ongoing legal fight for this right.
Transcripts
hey everybody how's it going welcome
back to Copper Jacket TV so today we're
going to be talking about Duncan vbon
which is an extremely important case out
of the state of California that is
currently sitting before the ninth
Circuit Court of Appeals now this is an
extremely important case because Duncan
challenges California's ban on magazines
that can hold more than 10 rounds and
this is a case that has been bounced
around the court system for quite some
time now and if you watch this channel
you know that Duncan was placed on hold
at the ninth circuit pending the
decision in rahimi at the Supreme Court
and that decision has since come and
gone so I've been getting a lot of
questions about it well I've got some
news for you guys today and
unfortunately it's not good news so if
you know anybody that you know wants
updates on what's going on with the mag
band case uh definitely share it with
them you know thumbs ups are always
appreciated and leave a comment down
below and you know join the conversation
because we got to talk about what just
happened now before we get too deep into
it this video is brought to you by one
of the most fun and exciting games that
you will ever play raid sh Shadow
Legends so I've been playing rage Shadow
Legends for a while now so you guys can
scan the QR code or click the link in
the description box and join my clan and
we can fight together rage Shadow
Legends is a turn-based battle game that
allows you to play against AI or
hundreds of thousands of other real
people who play the game now R Shadow
Legends is a very immersive game it
really allows you to get lost in this
Epic World of Champions you can dig deep
into your Champion's ability gain XP and
battle through different scenes along
the the way now if you download the game
you can take part in the Asgard divide
event and take control of your favorite
Asgardian Champions now you also don't
want to miss out on this special
promotion if you use my custom link down
in the description box you will get
legendary Loki for free plus two epic
packs just by logging in for seven days
in the Asgard divide event you'll see
Champions like Thor F Hammer Odin FAA
Freya Fay Weaver and Loki the deceiver
there's also extra bonuses like receive
epic champion tagar and epic Champion
Grizzle jar after reaching level 15 now
before all the bonuses are gone make
sure you guys scan that QR code or you
check out the link in the description
box download Rage Shadow Legends and
start playing today you can join me my
characters copper Jacket TV or you can
join my clan copper jacket so again
check it out and get it today okay so
let's go and Dive Right In and talk
about what's going on with Duncan vbon
now if you guys have been following this
case you know that it's been going on
for a while now people in California
have been waiting for some relief as a
matter of fact this is the case that
resulted in California's Freedom week a
onewe period where people could pretty
much get whatever they want in whatever
capacity they wanted and that was thanks
to judge Roger T Bonz a federal district
court judge who actually found that
California's ban was unconstitutional
twice the first time is what gave him
Freedom week the second time is why we
are up at the n9th Circuit Court of
Appeals yet again waiting for their
decision now I just want to say
something real quick I lived in
California during Freedom week and I
don't know about you but it was awesome
and I really hope we can get back to
that point for the people of California
again because I pretty much emptied my
bank account I mean that almost put me
in the poor house but that's what it
should be like every single day people
in California should have the freedom to
choose what they want uh nonetheless
here we are okay so now let's go and
talk about the bad news regarding Duncan
so unfortunately the bad news is that
the fourth Circuit Court of Appeals came
out with an absolutely horrendous
miserable terrible decision in bian V
Brown bian is a case that challenged
Maryland's so-called assault weapons ban
and the four Circuit Court of Appeals
found that they are not even protected
by the Plain text of the Second
Amendment saying that they are not
considered arms because they're not good
for personal self-defense now you're
probably asking yourself why would the
bian decision uh have anything to do
with the Duncan decision which has to do
with two different things well they are
very closely associated if you can ban
the one and say that it's perfectly
constitutional to do so then obviously
you can ban what they consider to be uh
an accessory for it right and so guess
who noticed that right away well
obviously uh Bon noticed that right away
and the California Department of Justice
decided to get a hold of the ninth
Circuit Court of Appeals who is trust me
looking for an out looking for some way
to side with the state of Cal California
californ on this and said here is why
you should make sure that our ban is
upheld and it's because of bian V Brown
and the fourth circuit's absolutely
horrendous decision not only that the
fourth circuit even said that if if the
plane text even did cover it it would
still be constitutional and then they
used uh an approach that bruan said you
weren't allowed to use so it was it was
a terrible decision on so many accounts
but I have the letter here this is the
letter from the California Department of
Justice to the ninth Circuit Court of
appeals and I want to read it to you
real quick and you'll see what I'm
talking about okay so this is the letter
that was sent from the California
Department of Justice Rob Bon's office
to the ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
and it was just sent last month uh and
it is regarding Duncan at all vbon and
it says Dear Miss dwire who is the uh
Clerk of the Court uh appellant writes
to notify this court of the forth
circuits unbun decision in bian V Brown
the fourth circuit considered a second
amendment challenge to Maryland's law
Banning so-called quote unquote assault
weapons after rejecting plaintiff's
facial challenge because plaintiffs
failed to show that each firearm
regulated by Maryland's statute is
within the Ambit of the Second Amendment
the courts considered the
constitutionality of Maryland's
restrictions the court applied Bruin's
two-step methodology which they didn't
they just made it look that way and
concluded at the first step that the
covered Firearms are not within the
scope of the constitutional right to
keep and be arms for self-defense the
court further held that quote even if
the text of the Second Amendment were
read to Encompass the covered Firearms
the statutory Provisions would
nonetheless be constitutional end quote
because maryn's ban is consistent with a
strong tradition of regulating
excessively dangerous weapons once it
becomes clear that they are uh enacting
an inordinate toll on public safety and
social well-being that's that's your
interest balancing approach right there
uh Public Health and Social well-being
which is exactly what bruan said you
were not supposed to do but that's what
they did while nonetheless preserving
avenues for armed self-defense so
basically what they're saying there is
that by preserving other avenues meaning
that we're just Banning this we're not
Banning everything and you still have a
way to defend yourself uh we should be
able to uphold this ban which is exactly
what the Ford circuit did they upheld
the ban so now again you have bont here
sending this letter to the ninth circuit
and I guarantee you the nth circuit is
going to be looking at this for whatever
nugget they can use to make sure that
Duncan is upheld for the State of
California and not for the plaintiffs
now we do have a rebuttal here sent by
the plaintiff's attorneys to the ninth
Circuit Court of Appeals and the
rebuttal basically says the Attorney
General's short summary of bian V Brown
uh August 6th on Bon lays bare the
fundamental problems with that decision
as the Attorney General uh dutifully
recounts the forth circuit held that
states May ban any and all arms uh that
in legislators and judges view have an
inordinate toll on public safety and
social well-being uh provided the states
preserve avenues for armed self-defense
and that was a a quote so it says that
is just means and scrutiny by another
name so it's uh the interest balancing
approach by another name asking whether
conduct has had what judges perceive to
be inordinate effects on social
wellbeing is no different from asking
whether a state has what judges perceive
to be a strong enough interest in
restricting that conduct interest
balancing approach is exactly again what
the Supreme Court said you were not
allowed to do in these types of cases
and asking whether a law leaves what
judges perceive to be sufficient avenues
for arm self-defense is just another way
of asking whether a law burdens more
constitutionally protected conduct than
judges perceive to be necessary to serve
the state's interest none of that is
consistent with the Supreme Court's
directives Bruin was not an invitation
for lower courts to do everything just
the same as before now it goes on from
there but that was a really good
response to the absolute Ridiculousness
that is the decision by the for circuit
in bian V Brown now obviously the ninth
circuit who is uh almost always in favor
of whatever California decides to pass
is going to still try and find any
nugget in there that they can end up
using and so obviously California has
used the argument we uh we showed the
oral arguments here on this channel but
has used the argument that that's just
an accessory and it's not necessary and
you still have the means uh of of using
something else that is of smaller
capacity and so being able to ban
anything that's bigger than that should
be just fine that's kind of where the
the ninth circuit has gone this backs up
that ninth circuit uh claim right and so
really it just adds a little bit of
credibility to something that the ninth
circuit already believes and so maybe
they ignore uh the the lawyers for the
plaintiffs here and just go along with
what the fourth circuit said because
obviously it's an appell Court they hold
quite a bit of power uh in precedent so
they can go ahead and just look at that
and say hey we're going to say the same
thing and that's the end of it right
there and keep in mind that Miller which
is another challenge in California is
pending the decision in Duncan and so we
have a lot going on here but the fact
that the for circuit messed up so bad it
is absolutely hurting us in dun and
could cause a lot of problems again all
the ninth circuit needs is that one out
now this leads me to believe that we're
going to be seeing a decision in Duncan
fairly soon hopefully we do and you know
obviously I'll keep you guys updated on
that so if you haven't subscribed yet
consider hitting that subscribe button
it's free it only takes a second but it
really helps us out a lot uh thumbs ups
are always appreciated and again
anything happens I will jump right back
in front of the camera and let you guys
know about it but Californians need that
uh need what they got before but instead
of just one week they need it forever
because that's their right thank you all
very much have a good one
Ver Más Videos Relacionados
Engblom v Carey (Landmark Court Decisions in America)💬🏛️✅
Plessy v. Ferguson Summary | quimbee.com
Structure of the Court System: Crash Course Government and Politics #19
School Segregation and Brown v Board: Crash Course Black American History #33
SE ESTREMECE EL REAGGEATTÓN POR DECISIÓN FEDERAL DEL GRAN COMBO - Usaron a los Beatles para decidir
Equal Protection: Crash Course Government and Politics #29
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)