9th Circuit reverses Peruta v. San Diego, strikes down "may issue"

Wow.

Where's the "Like" button?

Are you sure about the makeup of the panel? The opinion says it was written by O’Scannlain with Callahan joining and Thomas dissenting. According to Wikipedia, O’Scannlain was appointed by Reagan, Callahan by G.W. Bush, and Thomas by Clinton. It looks to me like it broke along the expected political lines, and that doesn't bode well for a potential en-banc reargument.

And the decision cites two different law review articles by me. I may have trouble getting out the door because of swollen head syndrome.

Just think Clayton, over a decade ago I phoned you up to tell you the good news that the RI Supreme Court had cited you, and the bad news that it was in the dissent. At the time, you were thrilled! Look how far you have come since then!

This has ramifications for New York in particular. This opinion is at variance with the 2d cir. It is a good argument and now, hopefully, will get to the USSC. New York, and some other states have gotten away with cavalier disregard for their citizens rights.

I don't think this was a CALGUNS foundation case. In fact, I thought CGF wanted nothing to do with this one. They fought to have their case separated.

OK, this has implications for the Drake case from NJ which has lost at their circuit panel and is trying for the Supremes. I think the odds of the Supremes taking Drake just got turbocharged now that there's a circuit split wider than the Grand Canyon if it had been repeatedly nuked.

If the Supremes don't take Drake my prediction is San Diego will try for En Banc review at the 9th but will NOT go to the Supremes, because gun-grabber strategy has to be to keep a carry case away from the Nine Robes in DC until one of the McDonald Five dies.

If Peruta stands in the 9th Circuit it will impact Hawaii, Guam, some other small islands out there :).

Also: Cali doesn't allow any carry whatsoever by out-of-state US citizens, and that is flat banned in Ward v. Maryland 1870 and Saenz v. Roe 1999 - esp. where a basic civil right from the Bill of Rights is concerned.

And when you have lost the Ninth Circus....

Congratulations, and the ego is warranted. It is a good decision, and knowing that your work was cited lets you know you are making a difference, even if it is with research rather than other ways.

there is a circuit split, and the Peruta ruling dissects those of the other circuits. worth the read.

Anything in CA law that will prevent SD County (and other anti-carry counties around the state) from adopting, say, Chicago's "shall issue" regime, with its fees, training, range time, etc. requirements?

wrangler,

As I understand it counties are allowed to set their own terms for having your application approved (background checks, letters from friends, good cause, etc) but the actual permit -costs- and training requirements are set by state law without county discretion.

I called the Sheriff Department today and they told me they are still using the same criteria as they have been and are going to appeal to the next court.

Is there a stay on this ruling? As I understand it if there isn't, then the county would have to begin issuing permits according to the new rules or risk violation a court order.

Peruta went as expected. Lately, all 2nd amm votes are political. Heller won due to 5 Bush/Reagan appointees vs 4 Obama/Clinton appointees. Peruta won due to 2 Bush/Reagan appointees vs 1 Clinton appointee. Thus proving you must be a Republican-appointed judge to accurately undertand the definition of the english words "keep and bear".