Major Decision: Boland v. Bonta, Central District of California; Preliminary Injunction on California Handgun Roster

[JAL]

This one has been brewing since August 2022. Boland v. Bonta is challenging California's Handgun Roster and was filed in the Central District of California. Today a preliminary injunction was issued enjoining California from enforcing their handgun roster. Its rules are nefariously crafted to gradually remove every handgun from approval for purchase in California. For every semi-auto handgun added to the approved roster, [correction] THREE older semi-auto handguns have to be removed from it. To be added now, handguns also must have extremely difficult features to implement such as micro-stamping serial numbers on shell casings and/or primers, as if primer indentations and unique shell striations weren't sufficient. The original Handgun Roster law was passed in 1999. No semi-auto handgun made has had all the required features since the roster law was amended in May 2013 to add the micro-stamping requirement -- theoretically possible, but completely impractical and exorbitantly expensive on some, and technically impossible on others. Even if possible, some sandpaper would easily remove the micro-stamp serial number in a matter of seconds.

Important to note this decision came out of California's Central District and Judge Cormac J. Carney, not from Saint Benitez' Southern District. Also of note, one of the several plaintiffs is Reno May, who has a very prominent 2nd Amendment and firearm enthusiast YouTube channel. Before wildly celebrating and calling your California buddies, there is no "Freedom Week" yet. The Preliminary Injunction doesn't take effect for 14 days (two weeks), which will give California some time to attempt getting the injunction stayed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Not only that, this is a Preliminary Injunction, not a final or permanent one. The case must still be heard -- the Fat Lady hasn't sung yet. However, its issuance (read the injunction) bodes well for Plaintiffs prevailing in their lawsuit. I can only imagine how livid Governor Newsom is. A picture of the veins popping out of his neck and forehead would be priceless.

Last June's NYSRPA v. Bruen SCOTUS decision and it opinion plus dicta referencing back to their 2008 Heller v. DC decision, with the four GVRs issued in its wake, are having a positive effect in some lower court decisions.

Read the case minutes here detailing case progress:
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/64860477/lance-boland-v-robert-bonta/

Read the Preliminary Injunction here (PDF file):
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.858747/gov.uscourts.cacd.858747.61.0_1.pdf

Some YouTube discussion on it here:






Reno May's YouTube Channel:
https://www.youtube.com/@RenoMay

Reno May's YouTube video on the Prelim Injunction:


Footnote:
Every win like this adds to case law that will be cited in other cases, even if obliquely in a different jurisdiction as an example of what other courts have decided.

 

[Alamo]

Thanks for posting this

 

[TapRackDingus]

Originally I had a two sentence reply, but I am going to add some relevant filler to comply with any content requirements. The original post would read

"GET REKT"

I hope California can enjoy the right to keep and bear arms as it was meant to be- as long as the rest of us- soon. They have incredible patience to suffer those tyrants.

 

[rosejm]

Never fear, the 9th Circus will step in and issue a stay.

 

[Ark]

Never fear, the 9th Circus will step in and issue a stay.

Yup. And then the case will ride up and down the Ninth Circus Shuffle for years and years to come, just like the fabled mag ban case. The name of the game is stall until they get 5 on SCOTUS again and can wipe away Bruen and Miller and the rest.

 

[JAL]

Yup. And then the case will ride up and down the Ninth Circus Shuffle for years and years to come, just like the fabled mag ban case. The name of the game is stall until they get 5 on SCOTUS again and can wipe away Bruen and Miller and the rest.

I believe SCOTUS is getting a bit tired of some of the Circuit courts playing games. When they turned down the plaintiff request to lift a 2nd Circuit Stay recently, which was considered an interlocutory motion, they also stated that if the 2nd Circuit didn't get off their duffs and deal with the case at hand timely, to come back -- involves challenges to the NY toddler tantrum in the wake of Bruen. That message wasn't lost on the 2nd Circuit. I've got a feeling that the 9th Circuit will also be told not to dilly-dally around if they start those games. Remember that two of the four GVRs that spilled out a week after the Bruen decision were jammed down the throat of the 9th Circuit. That's the view from where I'm sitting in the stands.