Do you wish to see a pro-gun appellate decide out of the ninth Circuit outright WRECK his anti-gun colleagues on a California journal ban case? ME TOO! LET’S DO THIS!!!!
The notorious ninth Circuit Court docket of Appeals, based mostly out of California, has as soon as once more vomited forth an enormous flume of phrase salad to justify the state’s unconstitutional ban on normal capability magazines—which means, something holding greater than ten rounds.
That’s no surprise-this case, Duncan v. Bonta, has been up and down between the federal district courtroom and the ninth Circuit Court docket of Appeals possibly 4 or 5 instances.
Greater than as soon as the trial district courtroom has held the journal ban to be unconstitutional and that’s even been confirmed on enchantment by a three-judge ninth Circuit appellate courtroom.
However the massive majority of liberal judges on the ninth Circuit can’t enable that to face, in order that they unlawfully demanded to listen to the case but once more en banc—with a a lot bigger group of judges than the conventional three-judge panel.
And right now that en banc panel spewed forth the nonsensical reply all of us anticipated—they magically discovered the ban on normal capability magazines to be constitutional underneath the Second Modification and Bruen.
The brilliant sport in all that is that one of many Judges, Choose Lawrence James Christopher VanDyke, not solely wrote a scathing dissent—he additionally recorded a video in his chambers demonstrating numerous options of precise weapons in his very personal palms, to beat the ridiculous majority opinion prefer it was a lifeless mule.
Be part of me as we watch Choose VanDyke’s video collectively, after which I learn by way of Choose Van Dyke’s wonderful written dissent, as properly.
Trending Merchandise
