D.C. Gets the Smackdown It Deserves

Published on March 25, 2026
Duration: 11:53

This video discusses the legal proceedings in Benson v. United States, focusing on the District of Columbia's attempts to delay or overturn a ruling that invalidated their magazine capacity ban. The DC Attorney General's office made several requests for en banc review and expedited schedules, all of which were denied by a three-judge panel. The analysis highlights the court's reasoning, particularly a concurring opinion that refutes the district's claims of impending chaos and destruction, attributing the issues to DC's own non-compliance with the ruling.

Quick Summary

The DC Court of Appeals denied the District of Columbia's requests for en banc review and an expedited schedule in Benson v. United States. The court found the District was manufacturing a crisis and that its own non-compliance with the ruling on magazine capacity was the cause of perceived issues, not the ruling itself.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Introduction: Benson v. United States Case
  2. 00:39Court's Ruling on DC's Unusual Requests
  3. 01:48Invitation to DC Attorney General's Office
  4. 02:21Denial of En Banc Review and Expedited Schedule
  5. 03:01Analysis of Concurring Opinion by Judge Deal
  6. 04:07Judge Deal: DC Manufacturing a Crisis
  7. 04:38Addressing Fears of 'Freedom Week' and Magazine Floods
  8. 05:43Criminals Don't Follow Gun Laws
  9. 06:03DC's Uncertainty on Enforceable Laws
  10. 06:16Benson is No Impediment to Policing
  11. 06:45DC Can Comply with Benson Easily
  12. 08:22DC's Silence on Registration is Deafening
  13. 08:48Analysis of Expedited Schedule Request Denial
  14. 09:48Pending En Banc Petition and Future Options
  15. 10:31Appeal to the Supreme Court?
  16. 10:51Case Recap and Docket Information
  17. 11:06Contact Washington Gun Law

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the outcome of the District of Columbia's requests in Benson v. United States?

The DC Court of Appeals denied the District of Columbia's requests for an en banc review and an expedited schedule in the Benson v. United States case. The court found that the District was attempting to manufacture a crisis and that its own non-compliance with the ruling was the cause of any perceived issues.

Why did the court deny the District of Columbia's request for an expedited schedule?

The court denied the expedited schedule request because the District had not acted with commensurate urgency when filing its own en banc petition, taking 13 days to do so. The court found it unreasonable to then ask the opposing party to respond in a significantly shorter timeframe.

What is the significance of the Benson v. United States ruling regarding magazine capacity in DC?

The Benson ruling invalidated the District of Columbia's ban on firearms equipped with 11+ round magazines. The court noted that the District's refusal to allow registration or licensing of such firearms was the basis for reversing convictions, and that the District could easily rectify this by complying with the ruling.

What did the concurring opinion in Benson v. United States state about the District's claims?

The concurring opinion stated that the District was manufacturing a crisis and that the ruling had no impact on enforcement because the US had already stopped prosecuting violations of the magazine ban. It also highlighted that the ban was ineffective, as evidenced by the high percentage of prosecutions involving magazines over the limit.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from Washington Gun Law

View all →