Breaking News: Major Victory At The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Stands

Published on August 7, 2025
Duration: 4:39

This video from Copper Jacket TV announces a significant legal victory at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The court has upheld a previous ruling that found California's '1-in-30 law,' which limits firearm purchases to one per month, to be unconstitutional. California's Department of Justice, led by Rob Bonta, failed to seek an en banc rehearing, meaning the three-judge panel's decision now officially stands, overturning the restrictive regulation.

Quick Summary

A significant legal victory has been secured at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, confirming that California's '1-in-30 law,' which restricted firearm purchases to one per month, is unconstitutional. The state failed to pursue an en banc rehearing, allowing the appellate court's decision to stand.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Major 9th Circuit Court Victory Announced
  2. 00:27Sponsor: Attorneys On Retainer
  3. 01:20California's 1-in-30 Law Deemed Unconstitutional
  4. 02:11CA Fails to Seek En Banc Review
  5. 02:56Victory: 1-in-30 Law Officially Overturned
  6. 03:43Concluding Thoughts on Legal Victory

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the major legal victory discussed on Copper Jacket TV?

The major victory is at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, where California's '1-in-30 law,' limiting firearm purchases to one per month, has been ruled unconstitutional and the ruling now stands.

Why did California's '1-in-30 law' ruling stand?

California's Department of Justice failed to file for an en banc rehearing by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals before the deadline. This allowed the decision by the initial three-judge panel to become final.

What is an 'en banc' review in the context of the 9th Circuit?

An en banc review is a rehearing of a case by a larger panel of judges from the entire circuit court, rather than the initial three-judge panel. It's typically sought when a party believes a prior decision was incorrect or has significant implications.

Who was involved in the Nuin v. Bonta case?

The case, Nuin v. Bonta, challenged California's '1-in-30 law.' Rob Bonta, as the Attorney General of California, and the California Department of Justice were the defendants, while the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) was involved in the legal challenge.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from Copper Jacket TV

View all →