When the 9th Circuit Gets So Bad, It Starts Calling Itself Out

Published on July 20, 2024
Duration: 9:26

This video analyzes a scathing dissenting opinion by Justice Van Dyke of the Ninth Circuit regarding the case United States v. Duarte. The dissent criticizes the Ninth Circuit's consistent practice of overturning favorable three-judge panel rulings on Second Amendment cases through en banc reviews, effectively subverting Supreme Court precedent like Bruen. Justice Van Dyke argues that the Ninth Circuit's majority is biased against firearms rights, leading to predictable outcomes that do not reflect a faithful application of the law.

Quick Summary

Justice Van Dyke's dissent in United States v. Duarte criticizes the Ninth Circuit's 'Groundhog Day' approach to Second Amendment cases, alleging a pattern of overturning favorable rulings via en banc review. He argues this subverts Supreme Court precedent like Bruen and indicates a judicial bias against firearms rights, leading to predictable negative outcomes for gun owners.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Introduction: Ninth Circuit's Judicial Criticism
  2. 01:01Sponsor: Right to Bear Legal Protection
  3. 01:52Case Overview: United States v. Duarte
  4. 02:29Justice Van Dyke's Scathing Dissent
  5. 03:03Groundhog Day Approach to Second Amendment
  6. 03:36Judicial Bias in the Ninth Circuit
  7. 04:27Cherry-Picking Precedent
  8. 06:05Ninth Circuit's 'Joy Ride' with Rahimi
  9. 06:46Rule of Law in Duarte Case
  10. 07:26Justice Van Dyke's Concluding Remarks
  11. 08:19Conclusion: Indictment of the Ninth Circuit
  12. 08:32Case Details and Dissent Link
  13. 09:01Final Thoughts: Responsible Gun Ownership

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the main criticism of the Ninth Circuit in the United States v. Duarte case dissent?

The primary criticism is the Ninth Circuit's alleged pattern of overturning favorable three-judge panel rulings on Second Amendment cases through en banc reviews. Justice Van Dyke argues this practice subverts Supreme Court precedent and indicates a judicial bias against firearms rights, leading to predictable negative outcomes for gun owners.

What federal statute is challenged in United States v. Duarte?

The case challenges 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), a federal law that prohibits all felons, including those convicted of nonviolent offenses, from possessing firearms. This statute is often interpreted to disarm felons for the rest of their lives.

How does Justice Van Dyke describe the Ninth Circuit's approach to Second Amendment cases?

Justice Van Dyke characterizes the Ninth Circuit's approach as a 'Groundhog Day' cycle, where favorable rulings for Second Amendment rights are consistently reviewed en banc and overturned. He suggests this predictable bias leads to outcomes that do not faithfully apply Supreme Court precedent like Bruen.

What is the significance of the Rahimi case in the context of the Duarte dissent?

The dissent notes that the Ninth Circuit is likely to use the Supreme Court's ruling in Rahimi to support its predictable conclusion that Mr. Duarte has no Second Amendment rights. However, the dissent argues that applying Rahimi's logic to Duarte's specific case should lead to the opposite conclusion, as the government failed to show historical analogues for disarming Duarte.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from Washington Gun Law

View all →