The Court ruled that a government may specify what mode of carrying to allow (open or concealed), but a government may not make it impossible for the vast majority of Californians to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.
they just t’ed this one up for the supreme court to finally issue a decision. Thats a scary thought if you read the dissents form the other 5-4 decisions
I’m surprised the 9th ruled this way!
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling on Peruta v San Diego
Effects people in Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington.
you never know what those people are going to do, I am very glad I will practicing in Texas…
GREAT friggin news! Dang, the 9th circuit, that is unbelievable.
Hopefully will have a direct impact on Maryland!
Never thought I would say this “way to go 9th!”
So has Hell frozen over . . .
It most certainly will. Same with DC, NY and other states (are their others?) that have CCW permits but make it nearly impossible for normal citizens get one.
This! The 9th has made a career of being overruled due to ignorance!
Just heard some disturbing news from a legal-eagle: oldMan Woollard is binding precedent in the 4th Circuit, so therefore we (MD) are stuck with the 4th Circuit’s view of the 2A. Our only out is the Supreme Court.
The 9th’s ruling has no direct impact on other circuits. They can use the 9th’s ruling as persuasive evidence if they’re taking up the issue for the first time, but otherwise their prior rulings hold.
The only reason this is actually important is because now there’s a split in the law between different circuits, which almost forces scotus to take notice and hear a case on the issue to make one ruling across America.
I don’t know what they’ll decide, but for now I’m glad as I often travel between Hawaii, California, and Nevada.
Indeed. That is what I was driving at.
While it will be a 5-4 split just like Heller “we” will win on this one. Add to this already existing reciprocity, and we may very well end up with national CCW.
IMHO what will lead to national CCW is, ironically, gay marriage. Once it is forced onto other states under the Full Faith and Credit Clause (a valid “license” in one state must be honored by others) then as long as our side has the balls to pursue it that recognition must be extended to carry permits also. You cannot have it both ways, although I’m sure the libtards will find some excuse as to how one is okay but the other isn’t.
How is that ironic?
Nj is a “May Issue” state as well, and has a case pending similar to that of the one coming from MD.
I could be wrong, but I’m thinking what he means is that gay marriage, an issue a lot of conservatives are vehemently against may, in a weird twist of fate, end up pushing through an issue that conservatives are strongly in favor of.
And I say fine. I’m not gay, none of my friends or close family members (as far as I know) are gay, and frankly I find it gross. But that’s my issue, and no one else’s. And if issuing gay couples marriage licenses in every state is what it takes for me to be able to drive from state to state with my gun on my hip without worrying about getting arrested; if it means “May issue” is a thing of the past, then I say hey, hand out all the marriage licenses they want!
SAF Challenge to NJ http://saf.org/?p=3013
On February 12, 2014, a 19 states, 34 members of congress and a number of other groups filed amicus briefs supporting SAF’s petition at the Supreme Court.
Bingo.
“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” - Neo-Marxist Saul Alinksy
Weird double tap.
I never, EVER, in my wildest dreams thought this would happen. As a resident of CA, I am elated. I do, however, fully expect the case to be appealed, and thus the ruling to be put on hold for the time being.