We need a lot more judges like this.
The backstory: Last week, a three-judge panel overturned a Ventura County, CA emergency measure that closed all gun stores at the beginning of the pandemic while allowing other “essential businesses” to operate. The ruling shredded Ventura’s attempt to preclude exercise of the right to bear arms, albeit on the relatively modest basis that it fails under any and all levels of scrutiny.
That’s where the fun begins. Judge Lawrence Van Dyke authored the controlling opinion, but in an unusual step, wrote a separate concurrence to his own ruling. In it, Van Dyke predicted that the Ninth Circuit would vote for yet another en banc hearing to justify the unconstitutional and decided to pre-empt it with a scathing bit of satire.
From there he lays out the tricks his fellow judges have used in the past to restrict 2A rights and predicts what will be in the en banc ruling. It's pretty savage.
The backstory: Last week, a three-judge panel overturned a Ventura County, CA emergency measure that closed all gun stores at the beginning of the pandemic while allowing other “essential businesses” to operate. The ruling shredded Ventura’s attempt to preclude exercise of the right to bear arms, albeit on the relatively modest basis that it fails under any and all levels of scrutiny.
That’s where the fun begins. Judge Lawrence Van Dyke authored the controlling opinion, but in an unusual step, wrote a separate concurrence to his own ruling. In it, Van Dyke predicted that the Ninth Circuit would vote for yet another en banc hearing to justify the unconstitutional and decided to pre-empt it with a scathing bit of satire.
From there he lays out the tricks his fellow judges have used in the past to restrict 2A rights and predicts what will be in the en banc ruling. It's pretty savage.
