Starting NOW!

🔗 👇

https://twitter.com/gunpolicy/status/1965123034844438916

Watch here:

Last week in a criminal case, the Fifth Circuit ruled that police cannot "Terry stop a citizen based solely on the fact that he is carrying a firearm," although the court upheld the stop in question on other grounds: ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/2… "But an officer cannot search or seize a person simply because he is keeping or bearing a firearm—any more than an officer can search or seize a person simply because he is keeping or bearing a piece of paper."

LEGAL ALERT: The Pennsylvania Superior Court has ruled that the state law making Philadelphia the only place that requires a permit to open carry violates the Fourteenth Amendment (as applied to the defendant): pacourts.us/assets/opinion… "Bruen and Rahimi confirm that the right involved in this case is fundamental."

We are live!!!

🔗👇

https://twitter.com/gunpolicy/status/1919769013812437319

You can listen live here:

LEGAL ALERT: The en banc Ninth Circuit has ruled 7-4 that California's magazine ban is constitutional because they "are neither 'arms' nor protected accessories." cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opin…


Judge VanDyke includes a video in his dissent that demonstrates how magazines work, with six judges joining a concurrence saying they are mad about him doing that:

LEGAL ALERT: Maine federal judge issues preliminary injunction against the state's 72-hour firearm waiting period. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco… "Though [Attorney General] Frey concedes that the Constitution makes inviolate a right to keep and bear arms, he asserts that it does not protect the corollary right to acquire arms, which is a curious construction indeed."

WE ARE LIVE!!!

https://twitter.com/gunpolicy/status/1843645037692780966

The government is up first

LEGAL UPDATE: After a hearing that started by the judge saying he read the motion to stay as saying "Judge, your order killed four people" and that the defendants' gave a "non-apology apology", the judge has DENIED the motion, meaning the decision (which applies to the plaintiffs) remains in effect. The judge says he will not sanction the defendants' lawyers, but that they need to be careful and that legal filings have a higher standard than facebook.

WE ARE LIVE!!!

5thcircuit.streamguys1.com/west

https://twitter.com/gunpolicy/status/1838209094399696982

We are up first.

The first question is why is the age cut off at 18 and not younger.

Our lawyer states our defendants aren't under 18 and that using the militia laws informs the cutoff at 18.

The gun control group March For Our Lives has apparently updated its "Policy Agenda" for the first time in years. Some interesting changes, a few of which indicate how some anti-gunners may be realizing their desired policies aren't as popular or feasible as they thought: The group's plan no longer wants a national gun license system to include personal references and yearly interviews with the police. It now says they should be renewed every 5 years, doesn't specify that the system should be run by police, and keeps a previous disclaimer that it "should be built with special attention toward equity"

The Ninth Circuit has denied en banc petitions in two cases challenging pre-trial gun possession bans, with Judge VanDyke writing a 51-page dissent and seven other judges writing a concurrence to explain why they disagree with VanDyke: cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opin…






VanDyke: "Judge Reinhardt would be proud."

From the opinion: "...if a court could not consider self-serving affidavits during summary judgment, then no summary judgment motion could ever be granted, including Ms. Foxx’s."

https://twitter.com/gunpolicy/status/1829643505897017744

"Ms. Foxx’s position—that government’s powers over public property are equivalent to those of private owners of property—is untenable, and was rejected by the Supreme Court long ago."

Today, FPC announced the filing of a brief with the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in Fort v. Grisham, its lawsuit challenging the New Mexico Governor’s total ban on carry in public parks and playgrounds. firearmspolicy.org/fpc-brief-new-… In a July 24th Order, the Court required the parties to file supplemental briefs answering three questions about the posture of the appeal.

The Second Circuit has ruled that a Connecticut police officer is not entitled to qualified immunity after handcuffing, detaining, and conducting a warrantless search on the plaintiff's car because they "presented a facially valid firearms permit and disclosed that he possessed a firearm pursuant to the permit": storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
The police officer argued that "the presence of the lawfully owned firearm in the vehicle gave him the requisite probable cause to detain Soukaneh, search the interior of his car, and search his trunk."

Since we have some new followers, here’s a 🧵 explaining our Core Beliefs (at )

We believe that the People’s access to and exercise of natural rights, including that to personal property, are necessary to achieve and maintain a free world. To that end:firearmspolicy.org/about We believe that all people have natural rights and are inherently entitled to life, liberty, and property, all of which are necessary to human flourishing.

The Ninth Circuit has granted the government's en banc petition in a criminal case challenging the federal felon firearm ban. Judge VanDyke writes a rare (and scathing) dissent, saying it "is a fantasy" to expect the Ninth Circuit to faithfully apply any of the Supreme Court's Second Amendment caselaw and that the court "is going to joyride Rahimi and the GVRs that followed it like a stolen Trans Am until the Supreme Court eventually corrects us (again)."
VanDyke: "The other 17/29ths of our bench is doing its best to avoid the Court’s guidance and subvert its approach to the Second Amendment. That is patently obvious to anyone paying attention. To say it out loud is shocking only because judges rarely say such things out loud."

This graphic is from the Surgeon General's video announcing his advisory on gun violence. The statistic it features has been pushed out a lot. We have three thoughts: First, 18 and 19-year-old adults are counted. These same adults--who can get married, drive a car, buy a house, assume debt, vote, and who the State gleefully drafts for war--are somehow considered children.

"'It would be arbitrary and capricious to ignore such matters.' But this is exactly what Defendants
did when they inexplicably and fundamentally switched their position on stabilizing braces without providing sufficient explanations and notice."

https://twitter.com/gunpolicy/status/1801253523260162556

"The ATF provided no explanations for how the agency came to these classifications and there is no 'meaningful clarity about what constitutes an impermissible stabilizing brace.'"

If you haven't read CA's Motion to block our victory in our Nguyen v. Bonta "1-in-30" Firearms Purchase Ban Lawsuit, you should. It's a fun one 🙄.

Here are some of the highlights:

According to California, the Second Amendment only protects "keeping" and "bearing" arms; apparently, acquiring a firearm isn't a necessary step to "keeping" and "bearing." ReEeEEEEeeeEE, people will be able to buy in bulk...

Hint: That's a good thing, actually.

WE ARE LIVE!

🧵👇

https://twitter.com/gunpolicy/status/1770274711408181744

You can follow along on this thread or listen live here: youtube.com/live/o-tJwn9G6…

Attention jackboots and anti-rights zealots:

Willfully caging peaceable people, like Dexter Taylor (@futureradiocast), for exercising their rights freely—by harmlessly possessing constitutionally protected arms—is the opposite of “I support the 2nd Amendment.”

🧵👇 “Dexter Taylor is a 52-year-old native New Yorker and a software engineer who enjoys building things. When he discovered the world of gun manufacturing, he believed he had found a new hobby and possibly a small business opportunity. Now, he is locked in a legal battle for his freedom against the state of New York.”