Supreme Court 6-3 Carry Decision Changes Second Amendment Fight Forever! State Defiance Challenged!
Summary
TLDRThe Ninth Circuit Court has issued a mixed decision on California's concealed carry ban, upholding restrictions in certain locations like bars and parks while striking down bans in hospitals and private property, citing Second Amendment violations. This has prompted multiple plaintiffs to seek en banc review in the Ninth Circuit. The decision's implications for permit holders are significant, and the potential for California to modify laws to mirror Hawaii's approach, which was deemed constitutional, raises concerns. The video also discusses the May v. Bonta case, part of the consolidated lawsuits, and the push for a favorable en banc panel decision to halt the enforcement of California's controversial SB2 law.
Takeaways
- 🚫 The Ninth Circuit Court has ruled that California's ban on concealed carry in certain locations, such as bars, restaurants serving alcohol, parks, and casinos, does not violate the Second Amendment.
- ✅ However, the court found that bans on concealed carry in places like hospitals, churches, medical facilities, public transportation, and private property do violate the Second Amendment.
- 🔄 The decision is mixed, leading to appeals for en banc panel review in the Ninth Circuit, including in the May v. Bonta case, which is one of the consolidated lawsuits.
- 🔄 The court used a looser version of the Bruen analysis, which considers historical regulations and their relevance to modern places, to uphold some location bans but not others.
- 🏛️ For places of worship, the court could not find historical justification for an outright ban on concealed carry, indicating the strength of the Bruen analysis even in a looser form.
- 📘 The court's decision on the 'catchall' or 'vampire rule' differed between California and Hawaii, with the latter's law being upheld due to its allowance for businesses to permit carry through signs or oral consent.
- 🚨 There are concerns that California could modify its laws to mirror Hawaii's and have its 'vampire rule' upheld, setting a precedent that other states might follow.
- 🔄 The decision has implications for concealed carry permit holders in California, as some aspects of the ban are upheld while others are struck down.
- 📚 The cases are still in an interlocutory process, with reviews of preliminary injunctions, and there is no guarantee that the Supreme Court would grant review due to the nature of preliminary injunctions.
- 🔄 Plaintiffs are seeking en banc panel review and possibly stays from the Ninth Circuit to keep all of SB2 halted while appeals are pending, aiming for a consistent approach to enforcement.
Q & A
What is the recent update regarding California's concealed carry ban?
-The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a mixed decision on California's concealed carry ban, striking down some parts as unconstitutional while upholding others.
Which parts of California's concealed carry ban were deemed unconstitutional by the Ninth Circuit?
-The ban on concealed carry in places like hospitals, churches, medical facilities, public transportation, and private property was deemed unconstitutional.
What locations did the Ninth Circuit uphold the concealed carry ban for?
-The ban was upheld for locations such as bars and restaurants that serve alcohol, playgrounds, parks, state parks, casinos, stadiums, libraries, zoos, museums, and all parking areas attached to those locations.
What is the significance of the Ninth Circuit using a looser version of the Bruen analysis?
-Using a looser version of the Bruen analysis allowed the court to uphold some location bans by finding historical regulations that were analogous to those cited by the Supreme Court, even if they were not a close match.
How did the Ninth Circuit differentiate between Hawaii's law and California's law regarding the 'catchall' or 'vampire rule'?
-Hawaii's law was upheld because it allowed businesses to allow concealed carry either by posting a sign or through writing or oral consent, whereas California's law only allowed permission through posting a sign, which was deemed too restrictive.
What is the next step for the plaintiffs in the California concealed carry ban cases?
-The plaintiffs are seeking en banc review in the Ninth Circuit, appealing the mixed decision to a larger panel of judges within the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Why is it important for the plaintiffs to appeal the decision to an en banc panel?
-Appealing to an en banc panel is important to potentially overturn the parts of the decision that upheld certain concealed carry bans and to prevent the establishment of precedent that could be used by other states to restrict Second Amendment rights.
What is the potential impact of the Ninth Circuit's decision on concealed carry permit holders in California?
-The decision could lead to confusion and inconsistency in the enforcement of concealed carry laws, depending on the outcome of the en banc review and any subsequent appeals.
Why might California or other states consider modifying their concealed carry laws in response to the Ninth Circuit's decision?
-States might modify their laws to mirror the aspects of Hawaii's law that were upheld, in an attempt to comply with the Ninth Circuit's interpretation of the Second Amendment while maintaining restrictions on concealed carry.
What is the role of the preliminary injunction in these concealed carry ban cases?
-The preliminary injunctions are used to halt the enforcement of certain aspects of California's concealed carry ban until the cases can be decided on their merits, and they are part of the interlocutory appeals process.
Outlines
🔫 California's Concealed Carry Ban Challenge Updates
The video discusses the recent developments in the legal battle against California's concealed carry ban. The Ninth Circuit Court has made a mixed ruling, invalidating certain restrictions such as bans in hospitals, churches, and public transportation, while upholding bans in places like bars, restaurants serving alcohol, parks, and casinos. The decision has prompted multiple plaintiffs to seek en banc review within the Ninth Circuit. The video also mentions the involvement of the channel's sponsor, Brownells, a pro-Second Amendment company, and provides a discount code for viewers. The speaker, Reno May, is part of the May versus Bonta case, which is one of the cases seeking en banc review.
🏛️ Analysis of the Ninth Circuit's Ruling on Concealed Carry
This paragraph delves deeper into the Ninth Circuit's decision, highlighting the court's use of a looser version of the Bruen analysis to uphold restrictions in certain sensitive locations. The court found that historical regulations do not support an outright ban on concealed carry in places of worship and private businesses. However, the court did uphold California's restrictions based on a signposting requirement, which was deemed more restrictive than Hawaii's law that allows both signposting and oral consent. The video raises concerns about the potential for California to modify its laws to mirror Hawaii's and avoid future legal challenges. The speaker anticipates that requests for stays will be filed to halt the enforcement of California's Senate Bill 2 (SB2) while appeals are pending and expresses hope for a favorable outcome from the en banc panel review.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Concealed Carry
💡Second Amendment
💡Ninth Circuit
💡Preliminary Injunction
💡Brownells
💡Scholar
💡En Banc Review
💡Catchall Provision
💡Hawaii Wolford Case
💡May v. Bonta
Highlights
Update on California concealed carry ban challenges seeking to overturn the state's new restrictions.
Introduction of sponsor Brownells, a Pro-2A company supporting the Second Amendment fight.
Ninth Circuit's decision on California's concealed carry ban, striking down some aspects while upholding others.
Invalidation of carry bans in hospitals, churches, medical facilities, public transportation, and private property as per the Ninth Circuit.
Upholding of California's ban in places like bars, restaurants serving alcohol, playgrounds, parks, state parks, casinos, stadiums, libraries, zoos, museums, and their parking areas.
Mixed decision from the Ninth Circuit leading to multiple plaintiffs seeking en banc review.
Appeal of the Ninth Circuit decision to the en banc panel in the Hawaii case and California challenges.
May versus Bonta case, one of the cases seeking en banc review, with plaintiffs including Reno May and the CRPA.
Federal district court judge's preliminary injunction against California's new CCW restrictions, which was appealed to the Ninth Circuit.
Ninth Circuit's use of a looser version of the Bruen analysis to uphold some location bans but not others.
Hawaii's law allowing businesses to allow carry through posting a sign or oral consent, which was upheld by the Ninth Circuit.
California's law only allowing permission through posting a sign, which was struck down as too restrictive.
Concerns that California could modify its laws to mirror Hawaii's and have its 'vampire rule' upheld.
Discussion on the implications of the Ninth Circuit's decision for concealed carry permit holders in California.
Anticipation of requests for stays from the Ninth Circuit en banc to halt the decision's enforcement until appeals are resolved.
Hope for a favorable draw from the Ninth Circuit en banc panel to find California's SB2 unconstitutional.
Call to action for viewers to like, comment, and subscribe to support the channel and stay updated on 2A news.
Transcripts
so I have an update for you in the
California concealed carry band
challenges which seek to strike down and
overturn the state of California's new
ban on conil carry so let's talk about
what is happening now really quick
before we jump into this video I want to
thank one of the new sponsors of the
channel which is brown LS I love Brown
L's I got to meet a lot of them over at
a recent event when we went out to Iowa
uh we did an event there some speaking
engagements and all that and I got to
know the guys better and I've known a
lot of them for a long time but just got
to tour their facility see what they do
they're an amazing company they're Pro
2A they believe in the 2A fight and so
if you guys are interested check out
brown L's I can't give you any links or
anything like that but check them out
and if you use a code scholar 10 you can
get 10% off of your order now as I
mentioned in the intro in this video I
have an important update for everyone in
California who are currently facing the
state of California's attempt to ban
conal carry Statewide the N circuit
recently issued their decision on
whether they will in fact overturn the
preliminary injunction with which is
currently in place against all of s SP2
the N circuit decided that the carry
bands that are currently in place in
places like hospitals churches medical
facilities public transportation and
then also the catchall private property
banss all of those are in fact invalid
that they violate the Second Amendment
but the nine circuit panel also found
that the state of California and their
carry ban in places like bars and
restaurants that serve alcohol
playgrounds Parks state parks casinos
stadiums libraries zoos museums and all
parking areas attached to those
locations were in fact okay that they
did not violate the Second Amendment and
therefore they upheld those aspects of
sb2 so this was a very mixed decision
from the ninth circuit which is now led
multiple plaintiffs in these
Consolidated lawsuits to now seek onbon
panel review in the ninth circuit so
they appealed that 9th circuit decision
up to the next level of the ninth
circuit both in the Hawaii case and now
one of the Cali challenges there have
been appeals up to the N circuit on bong
panel and one of those cases in fact is
one of the cases that I'm apptive in
along with Reno May in that case we're
going to be talking about is the May
versus bonta case now if you're not
aware in that case Reno May myself and
other plaintiffs joined along with crpa
and also gun owners of California to sue
the state of California because of their
new s SP2 law on review of this case the
federal district court judge judge
Cormac Carney granted a preliminary
injunction against various aspects of
California's new CCW restrictions that
preliminary injunction against sb2 was
appealed then up to the nth circuit and
was then Consolidated with other cases
one the FBC lawsuits and then also the
Hawaii Wolford case which has now also
been appealed up to the N circuit on Bon
panel in our case we received a
preliminary injunction halting the
enforcement of California's carry ban at
least until the case was decided on the
merits by judge Cormac Carney but as we
all knew the state of California was not
going to go quiet so they appealed up to
the 99th circuit they also filed for an
emergency state of that preliminary
injunction the Motions panel on the nth
circuit originally did Grant an
administrative stay but then the merits
panel that reviewed this case did remove
that stay that meant as we sat before
the N circuit decision all of SP2 was
blocked and the concealed carry laws
remained the same as if they were uh the
same before SP2 was even passed but now
we have that new decision from the ninth
circuit which upheld some aspects of sb2
and reversed some of the language from
the LW Court this of course has huge
ramifications for concealed carry permit
holders in California and that's why
it's now being appealed like I mentioned
the ninth circuit in their decision
struck down some parts of the carry ban
but upheld some others now in coming to
their conclusion the ninth circuit
actually used a looser version of the
Bruin analysis the ninth circuit stated
that we conclude that the proper
approach for determining whether a place
is sensitive is as follows for places
that have existed since the founding it
suffices for defendant to identify
historical regulations similar in number
and time frame to the regulations that
the Supreme Court cited as justification
for designating other places as
sensitive for places that are newer
defendant must point to regulations that
are analogous to the regulations cited
by the court taking into account that it
is illogical to expect a government to
regulate a place place before it existed
in its modern form for both types of
places historical regulations need not
be a close match to the challenge law
they need only evidence a principal
underpinning our nation's historical
tradition of regulating firearms in
places relevantly similar to those
covered by The Challenge law the nin
circuit used this looser historical
approach this looser Brewing analysis to
uphold some of these sens of location
bands but even the loose approach still
did not find enough historical
justification to completely ban
concealed carry in places like churches
and then every single private business
now when it came to the catchall vampire
rule the N circuit found that Hawaii's
law which was also part of some of these
cases that were challenged uh they found
that the Hawaii law varied enough from
the California law and therefore they
upheld the Hawaii law the catchall
phrase the vampire rule in Hawaii but
they said California's was different and
they struck down California the court
found that since Hawaii's law allowed
businesses to allow by posting a sign uh
but also through writing an oral consent
it was not a violation of the Second
Amendment but in contrast since
California's law only allows permission
through posting a sign they found that
that was too restrictive and did not
have historical support now this of
course opens up some possibilities and
also some concerns that I expressed in
my original video that California could
now simply have a Playbook to modify
their laws to try to mirror what Hawaii
did and what the ninth circuit found
would not violate the Second Amendment
so all californ californ had to do was
change some of their laws and then their
vampire rule would be upheld by the uned
circuit which is concerning to say the
least now when it came to specific bands
like places on worship the nth circuit
found that those locations clearly
existed at the time of our founding and
they could not find a single historical
law or analog that would support a state
outright Banning carry at those
locations that shows that even though
the court is using a looser approach
when it comes to bruan in that analysis
the bruan analysis is still so strong
that even a looser Bruin approach still
cannot find enough justification for
these types of outright banss at places
of worship and then also the catchall
provisions now after that decision there
were some questions about what would
some of these plaintiffs in these
Consolidated cases do uh since this was
a mixed bag decision in some of these
Consolidated cases there were some wins
and some losses there were questions on
whether or not they would in fact try to
seek onong panel review in my last video
I mentioned that there was probably no
doubt in my mind that the Hawaii Wolford
case would in fact go on Bon for review
because that is one of the biggest
losses unfortunately everybody in Hawaii
got the biggest loss because the N
circuit upheld the catchall vampire rule
in Hawaii and then also a lot of the
other Provisions so that one was a
little bit of a no-brainer to go to the
onong panel and now that case has been
filed for onong panel review but also
the California mayy bonta case is
seeking onong panel review now keep in
mind all of these cases are still in an
interlocutory process they're still
interlocutory appeals the reviews of
preliminary injunctions and even if
these cases eventually make their way
out of the N circuit onong panel and
eventually maybe seek Supreme Court
review there is no guarantee the Supreme
Court would Grant review because the
Supreme Court does not like preliminary
injunctions however I do understand that
there is a strong need to appeal right
now especially when you look at
plaintiffs like those out of Hawaii who
are facing a complete carry ban you
cannot have that language sit in effect
the Hawaiian laws and then also allowing
that language to stand opens up risk for
States like California and others to
Simply modify and mirror what Hawaii did
tried to pass those change their laws
and then that would sit as president and
the N circuit and other courts even
lower courts that want to rule Pro 2A
would have that language sitting there
as president that they would have to
follow so now onong panel appeals have
been filed and we will see ultimately
what happens I also anticipate there
will be requests for stays from the N
circuit on Bon panel uh to stay the N
circuit's decision to keep all of SP2
halted because you want a hodge podge
mix and match approach when it comes to
sb2 being enforced because that would be
super confusing for States like
California and Hawai so I anticipate
that that will be sought for the onbon
panel to Grant and then hopefully the
nin circuit onbon panel grants this day
and all of sb2 remains halt while these
appeals are taking place and also we are
going to be hoping for a favorable draw
from the nin circuit because if you're
not aware the N circuit on bong panel
operates through a randomly selected uh
10 judges that are selected and then the
11th judge is the chief judge so
hopefully we get a favorable pro toway
panel that will find that SP SP2 is is
in fact unconstitutional so that's
what's happening in California and
Hawaii with the concealed carry bands as
we get more information I will let you
guys know also if you like this video
and you would like support the channel
one of the best ways to do that is to
like comment and subscribe all those
things help to fuel the algorithm and it
signals to YouTube that you guys see
value in these videos and in this type
of 2A news but as always thank you all
for watching don't forget to like and
subscribe and never forget this nation
was built B Scholars and this nation
will be maintained B Scholars
[Music]
Посмотреть больше похожих видео
California "Magazine Ban" Update, Duncan v. Bonta
We Overturned Bad Law In Both NY & CA!
IMPORTANT: Is Open Carry Protected By 2A?
Engblom v Carey (Landmark Court Decisions in America)💬🏛️✅
McDonald v. Chicago, EXPLAINED [AP Gov Required Supreme Court Cases]
Structure of the Court System: Crash Course Government and Politics #19
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)