California is not running scared. The overwhelming majority of the 29 active judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals are hostile to the Second Amendment. Unless the rules have changed recently, the dissenting senior status judge, N. R. Smith, is eligible to be part of the en banc pool of judges from which ten judges will be "randomly" drawn. The chief judge is anti-gun. That means for Baird to lose before the en banc panel, the state only needs five anti-Second Amendment judges from a stacked deck of anti-Second Amendment judges.
My only surprise is that the state isn't asking for an extension of time to file the en banc petition. Mark Baird is an old man and the lone plaintiff in the case. It is in the state's interest to prolong the en banc proceedings. If Mr. Baird dies, his case becomes moot.
Mr. Baird's is moot. As they clearly state this has to be done withing months, if not weeks, while the panel may be stacked they are still wild cards. This could still go to SCOTUS and they know they'd lose there.
The case is not moot until Mark Baird dies or otherwise stops prosecuting his case. There will not be an en banc panel decision in weeks or months. It will take a year or more; almost certainly more. The en banc petition has to be filed. A response must be requested on the petition. The response must be filed. A vote on whether to grant the petition must be taken. If successful, additional briefs will be written and filed. Then a date for oral argument will be set. Oral argument will take place. And then we wait a year or more for the en banc opinion to be filed. In the unlikely event that Mr. Baird wins a majority on the en banc panel, a dissenting judge can withhold the release of the favorable opinion for as long as he wants.
I still this in house release as Cali running scared their own tone on timing hits different. We have this time frame and this one. Not we will win on the merits of the case.
Would be interesting if anyone protests while open carrying at or near State Capitol in Sac what will happen legally? Carry cowboy guns or black powder
Tldr is that California will continue to be dicks until they are forced to stop.
This reads as Cali is running scared. They know they will lose.
California is not running scared. The overwhelming majority of the 29 active judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals are hostile to the Second Amendment. Unless the rules have changed recently, the dissenting senior status judge, N. R. Smith, is eligible to be part of the en banc pool of judges from which ten judges will be "randomly" drawn. The chief judge is anti-gun. That means for Baird to lose before the en banc panel, the state only needs five anti-Second Amendment judges from a stacked deck of anti-Second Amendment judges.
My only surprise is that the state isn't asking for an extension of time to file the en banc petition. Mark Baird is an old man and the lone plaintiff in the case. It is in the state's interest to prolong the en banc proceedings. If Mr. Baird dies, his case becomes moot.
Mr. Baird's is moot. As they clearly state this has to be done withing months, if not weeks, while the panel may be stacked they are still wild cards. This could still go to SCOTUS and they know they'd lose there.
The case is not moot until Mark Baird dies or otherwise stops prosecuting his case. There will not be an en banc panel decision in weeks or months. It will take a year or more; almost certainly more. The en banc petition has to be filed. A response must be requested on the petition. The response must be filed. A vote on whether to grant the petition must be taken. If successful, additional briefs will be written and filed. Then a date for oral argument will be set. Oral argument will take place. And then we wait a year or more for the en banc opinion to be filed. In the unlikely event that Mr. Baird wins a majority on the en banc panel, a dissenting judge can withhold the release of the favorable opinion for as long as he wants.
I still this in house release as Cali running scared their own tone on timing hits different. We have this time frame and this one. Not we will win on the merits of the case.
Would be interesting if anyone protests while open carrying at or near State Capitol in Sac what will happen legally? Carry cowboy guns or black powder
A separate law prohibiting firearms around the Capitol building is still in effect, even if the panel had issued an immediate injunction.
The one from like the black panthers wasn’t it when they protested inside the Capitol.
Yes, the Mulford Act of 1967 included more than the statute prohibiting the Open Carry of loaded firearms (then PC 12031, renumbered to PC 25850).