About that unconstitutional California mag ban

California, as expected, has asked for a stay of Judge Benitez’ ruling pending appeal.

all four factors considered in such a stay request are satisfied. See Humane Soc’y of U.S. v. Gutierrez , 558 F.3d 896, 896 (9th Cir. 2009) (“A party seeking a stay must establish [1] that he is likely to succeed on the merits, [2] that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of relief, [3] that the balance of equities tip in his favor, and [4] that a stay is in the public interest.”

1. No way in hell Benitez will see them as likely to win.

2. Becerra suffers no harm from innocent people buying standard capacity mags.

3. Eh?

4. Benitez already made the point that the ban was not in the public interest.

This is all set up for the appeal.

until the Judgment is stayed pending appeal, individuals will be free to acquire new LCMs, and there is evidence that sales have begun already. If Section 32310 is ultimately reinstated by the Ninth Circuit, it will be difficult for the State to remove these new LCMs.

Yep. Just like they are incapable of confiscating once-lawfully owned firearms when they even know who has what where. Unregistered mags? Ain’t happening.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s