By Tanya Metaksa
What’s New—SCOTUS has a conference date on December 13, 2024: California: Ninth Circuit: Rhode v. Becerra/Bonta: Case #24-542:Today, Dec. 4, oral arguments before the three-judge panel (Clifton, Callahan, and H. A. Thomas) of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit will be held in the longest-running gun case before the Ninth Circuit. If you want to follow it, Attorney @Kostas Moros will be live tweeting it on X (formerly known as Twitter); Snope v Brown, (formerly Bianchi v. Brown), Case #24-203: a writ of certiorari may be decided; Barnett et al. and National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. v. Raoul: Case #24-3060, #24-3061, #24-3062, #24-3063 (consol.) is before the US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois; Heeter v. James: Case 24-cv-00623-JLS: The case continues with the defendants, the State of NY requesting the case to be dismissed; Sullivan v. Ferguson, a magazine ban case that is stayed the lawsuit pending the result of the Ninth Circuit case, Duncan v. Bonta, challenging California’s ban; Missouri: State Attorney General suing Jackson County for passing a gun control ordinance in violation of state preemption law; Washington: State of Washington v. Gator’s Custom Guns: Case No. 23-2-00897-08: This state court case will now be litigated in the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
SCOTUS
A federal lawsuit challenging Maryland’s “assault weapons” ban as unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, Snope v Brown, (formerly Bianchi v. Brown), Case #24-203: A petition for a writ of certiorari was filed on August 21, 2024, with the question presented being: “Whether the Constitution permits the State of Maryland to ban semiautomatic rifles that are in common use for lawful purposes, including the most popular rifle in America.”
The state of Maryland filed its brief in opposition on Nov. 11, followed by the reply brief from the Petitioners, and the case was Distributed for Conference on Dec. 13. Thus, gun owners hope SCOTUS grants certiorari and then schedules the case for oral arguments in early 2025.
Circuit Court
California: Ninth Circuit: Rhode v. Becerra/Bonta: Case #24-542: Today, Dec. 4, oral arguments before the three-judge panel (Clifton, Callahan, and H. A. Thomas) of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit will be held in the longest-running gun case before the Ninth Circuit. If you want to follow it, Attorney @Kostas Moros will be live tweeting it on X (formerly known as Twitter).
Background: This case began in 2016 as Rhode v. Becerra, Case # 3:18-cv-00802-BEN-JLB. The plaintiff is Kim Rhode, an American OLYMPIC medalist that few of her fellow citizens have ever heard about. She has won six Olympic Medals in skeet shooting/double trap in six consecutive Olympic Games since 1996. Three gold medals, 1 Silver and two Bronze. She is also a six-time national champion in double trap. The issue is the 2016 California law that voters passed as Proposition 63. US District Judge Roger Benitez declared that the ammunition background check requirement for purchases violated the Second Amendment and declared it unconstitutional. However, hours after that decision, The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted a temporary stay on the preliminary injunction by Judge Benitez. Then, that court vacated and remanded the case back to the District Court for the Southern District of California to be revisited based on the Bruen case. All restrictions on purchasing ammunition in California that have been in effect for almost 5 years remain.
On Jan. 30, 2024, Judge Benitez issued his decision that “The ammunition background checks laws have no historical pedigree and operate in such a way that they violate the Second Amendment right of citizens to keep and bear arms.”As a result, there were four days in which Californians could purchase ammunition without a background check. On Feb. 5, the US Court of Appeals motions panel for the Ninth Circuit granted Attorney General Rob Bonta’s motion for a stay.
Illinois: Seventh Circuit
Barnett et al. and National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. v. Raoul: Case #24-3060, #24-3061, #24-3062, #24-3063 (consol.): On Nov. 8, the State of Illinois filed a Notice of Appeal, followed on Nov. 11 by a Motion to vacate the District Court injunction and reverse the District Court’s order to stay the injunction to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. The Plaintiffs-Appellees, Barnett et al., filed their Response to Defendants-Appellants’ Motion to Stay Injunction Pending Appeal on Nov. 27. Illinois (Defendants-Appelants) filed their response on Dec. 3. We now await the panel for the Seventh Circuit.
Background:
Harrel v. Raoul and Barnett v. Raoul: Case #3:23-cv-00141-SPM: This case was filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois on Jan. 17, 2023, by the Second Amendment Foundation, The Firearms Policy Coalition, Marengo Guns, Inc., C4 Gun Store, and David Harrel against the large capacity magazine ban that Gov. JB Pritzker signed on that date. On Jan. 25, Plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction (PI). All parties agreed on a motion for a coordinated preliminary injunction briefing, adding the following cases: Federal Firearms Licenses of Illinois v. Pritzker, Caleb Barnet v. Raoul, and Langley v. Kelly in the US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois. On April 28, Judge Stephen Patrick McGlynn issued a preliminary injunction preventing enforcement of PICA. Judge Stephen P. McGlynn ruled on Nov. 8 that the “Court must take action as justice demands.” He said PICA is an unconstitutional affront to the Second Amendment and must be enjoined. The Government may not deprive law-abiding citizens of their guaranteed right to self-defense as a means of offense.”
District Court
New York: Second Circuit
Heeter v. James: Case 24-cv-00623-JLS: The defendants, the State of New York, are asking for the case to be dismissed.
Background: After a shooting in Buffalo, NY, where the assassin wore body armor, Gov. Kathy Hochul rallied the legislature to ban the sale and possession of body armor by citizens. They passed a law that is one of the strictest in the country, banning the sale and ownership of bullet-resistant vests to civilians. After the plaintiffs filed their lawsuit on July 1, the Attorney General’s office filed a motion to dismiss on Aug. 2, alleging that the plaintiff did not have standing because they had not suffered a “ concrete injury.” All in all, there were three motions on the question of standing. The question of standing is a way for those taken to court to explain to the Court that the case should not continue because there is no injury to the plaintiff. On Nov. 8, Judge John L. Sinatra denied the defendants’ motions to dismiss this case and said the case against NY’s ban on body armor would continue. Judge Sinatra’s opinion is here.
Washington: Ninth Circuit
Sullivan v. Ferguson:
Background: The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) filed this lawsuit on Feb. 3, 2023, against the Washington State standard capacity magazine law that became effective July 1, 2022. Judge David G. Estudillo has stayed the lawsuit pending the result of the Ninth Circuit case Duncan v. Bonta, which challenges California’s ban.
State Court
Missouri: Jackson County Legislature, which covers Kansas City, MO., has spent most of the summer working on an ordinance banning young adults between 18 and 20 from buying, owning, and possessing firearms and ammunition. After the ordinance was passed, County Chief Executive Frank White vetoed the ordinance, writing in a letter that the ordinance violated state law 21.759.2 RSMo, which prevented counties from adopting gun ordinances. He stated that the ordinance “puts the County in an unnecessary legal battle that will burden taxpayers with the costs of a legal defense that will lose.”
On Nov. 18, the county legislature overrode White’s veto by an 8-0 vote. Andrew Bailey, MO Attorney General, has announced that he intends to file suit against the county over this violation of state law.
State of Washington v. Gator’s Custom Guns: Case No. 23-2-00897-08: On April 25, State Supreme Court Commissioner Michael Johnston ruled that the high-capacity magazine ban will remain. In his ruling, he wrote that this happened in California when a similar law was enjoined: “During the feeding frenzy to buy LCMs after the superior court entered its ruling, customers frequently bought as many as 10 LCMs, one person claiming to have purchased 45 of them.”
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit now takes up the case.
Background: After the passage of ESSB 5078 in 2022, a bill that made the sale and possession of magazines with more than 10 round capacity illegal, the State of Washington filed a Consumer Protection Act (CPA) enforcement action against Gator’s Custom Guns, Gator’s responded that ESSB 5078 violated Washington Constitution, Article 1, Art.1, § 24 and the U.S. Constitution and filed a lawsuit. In the Superior Court of Washington for Cowlitz County on April 8, 2024, Judge Gary D. Bashor issued the following order: “As such there is no set of facts this Court can conceive of which would allow the Consumer Protection sections of ESSB 5078 as written to pass constitutional muster. This Court specifically finds those sections unconstitutional.
Order
“1. The Court Grants the Defense Motion for Summary Judgement on both its Article 1, Section 24 claim and on their Second Amendment Claim.
“2. The Court Denies the State’s Motion for Summary Judgement on both its Article 1, Section 24 claim, and its Second Amendment Claim.”
The Court also enjoined the State of Washington from enforcing any provisions of ESSB 5078. Within hours, the Supreme Court of the State of Washinton issued a temporary stay.On April 25, State Supreme Court Commissioner Michael Johnston ruled that the high-capacity magazine ban will remain. In his ruling, he wrote that this happened in California when a similar law was enjoined: “During the feeding frenzy to buy LCMs after the superior court entered its ruling, customers frequently bought as many as 10 LCMs, one person claiming to have purchased 45 of them.”
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit now takes up the case.
