9th Circuit Told To Ignore Supreme Court Cases In Magazine Ban Case! Duncan v. Bonta

Published on July 29, 2021
Duration: 9:51

This video details the legal battle surrounding California's ban on large-capacity magazines (LCMs), specifically the Duncan v. Bonta case. The Ninth Circuit is being urged by plaintiffs to consider recent Supreme Court decisions like AFP v. Bonta, which established exacting scrutiny for certain disclosure laws. California, however, argues these cases are irrelevant to LCM bans and advocates for intermediate scrutiny, claiming LCM restrictions are a minor burden on Second Amendment rights and crucial for public safety. The outcome hinges on whether the Ninth Circuit applies heightened scrutiny or the state's preferred standard.

Quick Summary

California is urging the Ninth Circuit to disregard Supreme Court rulings in the Duncan v. Bonta magazine ban case, arguing they are irrelevant. Plaintiffs contend that recent decisions establishing 'exacting scrutiny' should apply, while California prefers 'intermediate scrutiny,' claiming LCM bans are a minor burden and crucial for public safety.

Chapters

  1. 00:00California Ninth Circuit Magazine Ban Case Overview
  2. 00:29California Challenges Ninth Circuit with 28J Letters
  3. 00:49Duncan v. Bonta Case Background: Magazine Capacity Restrictions
  4. 01:24California Appeals Magazine Ban Ruling to Ninth Circuit
  5. 01:58New Supreme Court Cases Submitted by Plaintiffs' Counsel
  6. 02:27AFP v. Bonta Case Details: Donor Disclosure
  7. 03:04Lower Courts Ruled Donor Disclosure Law Unconstitutional
  8. 03:31Exacting Scrutiny Analysis Explained
  9. 04:09Magazine Confiscation and the Takings Clause
  10. 04:48Plaintiff Argues Unlawful Confiscation with New Case Law
  11. 05:04California States Americans for Prosperity Doesn't Support Plaintiffs
  12. 05:22Distinguishing the Bonta Case: Second Amendment vs. Disclosure
  13. 05:43California Wants Intermediate Scrutiny for Magazine Bans
  14. 05:59California Avoids Heightened Scrutiny for Magazine Laws
  15. 06:26California's Argument: Ten-Round Magazine Burden is Minimal
  16. 07:16California's Argument: Reloading or Swapping Guns is Sufficient
  17. 07:39State Claims No Harm from 10-Round Limit
  18. 07:57California Argues Cedar Point Case is Not Applicable
  19. 08:46The 9th Circuit May Not Have the Final Say on Magazine Bans

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the core legal issue in the Duncan v. Bonta case regarding magazine bans?

The core issue is whether California's ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds violates Second Amendment rights. Plaintiffs argue recent Supreme Court decisions on scrutiny standards should apply, while California contends these cases are irrelevant and advocates for a lower scrutiny level.

Why is California asking the Ninth Circuit to ignore Supreme Court cases?

California argues that cases like AFP v. Bonta, which dealt with compelled donor disclosure and applied exacting scrutiny, are not analogous to Second Amendment challenges of magazine capacity restrictions. They want the court to apply intermediate scrutiny instead.

What is 'exacting scrutiny' and why is it important in this case?

Exacting scrutiny is a heightened standard of review. In AFP v. Bonta, the Supreme Court used it to find California's donor disclosure law unconstitutional because it wasn't narrowly tailored. Plaintiffs want this standard applied to magazine bans, which would likely deem them unconstitutional.

What is California's main argument against applying heightened scrutiny to magazine bans?

California's main argument is that magazine capacity restrictions are a minor burden on Second Amendment rights, as individuals can still defend themselves by reloading or switching firearms. They claim the law is reasonably fit to their interest in reducing mass shooting casualties.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from Armed Scholar

View all →