For the first few days of 2024, the state of California was under an unconstitutional gun ban. Sure, the West Coast, Messed Coast™ Democrat gun grabbers didn’t call it a ban, but the state’s shiny new 2024 law banning guns from “sensitive areas” made nearly all public places gun-free zones for concealed carry license holders. The ban was the feature, not a bug, of California’s law. On January 6, a troika of federal appeals court judges pulled the rug out from the gun grabbers.
Gavin gets got
This case and others in California, Oregon, and Washington are the reason for a special West Coast, Messed Coast™ gun grabbers edition.
The road to this temporary freedom is long, bumpy, and full of black robes and long briefs.
After SB2 passed, Second Amendment advocates went to district court to put the kibosh on it. The court issued an injunction, stopping the law from going into effect. But what ho! the gun grabbers appealed that decision to the 9th Circuit, which put a temporary pause on the injunction against the new law. Stay with me.
The pro-Constitution crowd then asked for a hearing on the law and on Saturday, January 6, a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals threw out its pause on the injunction against the new law. This ruling blows up the gun ban until the entire SB2 bill is aired before the full appeals court. Got it?
Related: California’s ‘Scorched Earth’ War on Gun Rights Presses On Despite Court Smackdown
The 9th Circuit stopped the part of SB2 that created gun-free “sensitive areas.” Gun grabbers said but, but, your honor, they can bring license concealed handguns everywhere that’s not a sensitive area! Except, as the appeals court judge noted, “categories of places, such as hospitals, public transportation, places that sell liquor for on-site consumption, playgrounds, parks, casinos, stadiums, libraries, amusement parks, zoos, places of worship, and banks, as ‘sensitive places’ where concealed carry permit holders cannot carry their handguns” were tantamount to a ban because they “effectively abolish[es] the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding and exceptionally qualified citizens to be armed and to defend themselves in public.”
🚨 FPC WIN 🚨
The 9th Circuit has dissolved the administrative stay in our Carralero v. Bonta California Public Carry Bans Lawsuit and DENIED CA’s Motion for a Stay Pending Appeal.
This means all public carry bans blocked by our District Court injunction are blocked again. pic.twitter.com/NJDokAdPmP
— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) January 6, 2024
The lawfare left continues to try and bleed the pro-Second Amendment forces dry, testing all four corners of the Bruen Supreme Court decision and trying to make gun ownership as byzantine and expensive as possible.
After Saturday’s ruling by the 9th Circuit, California Governor Gavin Newsom, the man who thinks nothing of releasing violent offenders from prison and watches detachedly as district attorneys fail to lift a finger to put dangerous people in jail in the first place, issued a statement that said “this dangerous decision puts the lives of Californians on the line.”
When Newsom says something that hysterical, you know he feels like he’s getting got.
Good.
Thank you, Sheriff
Sister publication Bearing Arms reports on the increasing number of California’s 58 sheriffs who say they won’t enforce SB2 anyway.
Cam writes that Sutton, Tulare, and Yuba county officials folded their arms:
The first cracks in the wall that Gavin Newsom and his fellow Democrats have erected around the right to carry appeared on Wednesday afternoon, when Sutter County Sheriff Brandon Barnes and Sutter County District Attorney Jennifer R. Dupré released a joint statement that encouraged “citizens to obey the law” while vowing to use their discretionary power to not criminalize “constitutionally protected behavior”.
Yolo County’s sheriff and DA invoked the court’s own words when they released a joint statement of their own calling, SB 2 “repugnant to the United States Constitution.”
No, no, no, no, and no
In Oregon, where Measure 114 was stopped from going into effect by Harney County Judge Rob Raschio, both the gun grabbers (the state of Oregon) and the grabees were back in his courtroom so the state could throw an official wing ding.
Measure 114 is yet another attempt by the left to deprive gun owners of normal-sized magazines. The measure labeled any magazine of more than ten bullets as “high capacity” and outlawed them. This was after a California-based federal court judge ruled the magazine ban unconstitutional.
Raschio enjoined the law from taking effect in a bench trial before Thanksgiving.
Related: Judge Obliterates Oregon’s Newest Gun Grab
But the state objected, and Raschio gave the state’s stable of lawyers the ability to air out their complaints in a hearing on January 2.
The state claimed that the FBI was willing to temporarily play ball with the gun grabbers and allow the state to use its background check information. The judge said that was a no-go because the FBI had previously claimed it wouldn’t allow this access because Measure 114 “does not meet the requirements of Pub. L. 92-544.” The net effect was that Second Amendment defenders were able to smoke out the backroom deal with the FBI to keep Measure 114 live and then renege the offer later after gun grabbers had outlawed the ammo.
But shortly after Judge Raschio issued his Nov. 21 opinion, the FBI changed its position, stating that it would grant Oregon a “grace period.” It turns out the judge didn’t trust the FBI, either.
The state also objected “to the court’s finding that the parties had ‘agreed’ that Measure 114 ‘delays the purchase of firearms for a minimum of 30 days,'” the Epoch Times reported.
The state “objected to the court’s findings that mass shootings are sensationalized by the media, that the measure’s backers failed to present evidence of enhanced public safety.”
The state’s phalanx of tax-paid lawyers objected to the argument that bullets in a magazine are “a necessary component of a firearm.”
They even took issue with the historical evidence presented that “almost all emigrants to the Oregon Territory had firearms.”
Raschio held up his light saber-like gavel and repelled every single argument the more than 25 taxpayer-paid attorneys lost the first time they were before him.
And with that he made his injunction against Measure 114 permanent.
Related: The Treacherous Way West Coast, Messed Coast™ Governors Threaten the Gun Rights of All Americans
This case is headed to the state court of appeals and beyond.
There they go again
Last September, right before Oregon state trial on the ammo ban, a Washington state-based federal judge issued a suspicious, dubious, and felony-dumb federal decision that displayed a willingness to pretend not to know what a gun is.
As I wrote at the time in another special gun grabber edition of West Coast, Messed Coast™:
Judge Mary K. Dimke, emphasis on the “dim,” ruled that the plaintiffs challenging the Washington law were unlikely to succeed because they “offered insufficient evidence suggesting that the text of the Second Amendment was meant to include large capacity magazines.” See what happens when your side’s in charge of making up words and their definitions? Furthermore, Dimke didn’t even think that magazines were part of a gun or even covered by the Second Amendment. I am not making this up.
She said, “The Court must insist that there be a historical record in order to make a determination on the meaning of the word ‘arms’ as used in the Second Amendment.”
Well, as that issue wends its way through the court, Bill Kirk at Washington Gun Law has looked at what’s in the hopper for the 2024-25 session of the state legislature and finds an even bigger case of stupid.
A bill filed in the Washington State Legislature, House Bill (HB) 2054, would limit people who want to exercise their Second Amendment to only once every 30 days.
Kirk says that’s like telling a religious adherents they can only go to church once a month. Or telling street preachers or protesters they may exercise their free speech on only two weekends a month. Or telling citizens they may invoke their right to privacy, such as it is, on a limited basis.
If you think that’s absurd, you’re getting the idea of the idiocy of this bill.
Fighting for our rights occurs here, everyday, at PJ Media. You see, here we understand that the Second Amendment isn’t a second rate civil right; that without it, the American public would have no way to fight our way out of tyranny. We take this responsibility seriously. If you agree, then you should become a VIP or VIP GOLD Member.
Joe Biden and his censorious praetorians want to shut us up. Hell, they’ve used their raw power to demonetize many of our stories that they find inconvenient.
So, we’ve got to pack up.
We’re fighting for America but the president’s censors are trying to shut us down. Please support our journalism by becoming a VIP or VIP GOLD Member. Please use the promo code SAVEAMERICA for 50% off your VIP Membership. This gives you access to all our stories, even those behind our velvet rope. VIP Membership allows you to comment on all stories.
VIP GOLD member gives you access to all the content at all the Townhall Media sites: PJ Media, Townhall, RedState, Twitchy, Bearing Arms, and HotAir.