News

Ninth Circuit to Reconsider Game-Changing Peruta Decision

On March 26, 2015, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ordered that Peruta v. San Diego will be re-heard by an eleven-judge “en banc” panel.  The Court also ordered that the related case of Richards v. Prieto, which was decided under the reasoning outlined in Peruta, will be heard along with the Peruta case. This includes setting aside the original rulings in the cases and stating that they are not to be used as case law. See our previous coverage of Peruta here and here for more background.

Edward-Peruta-law-books-1200
Lead plaintiff Edward Peruta is a legal investigator for Connecticut gun-rights attorney Rachel Baird. He’s also an NRA member and a Marine who saw combat in Vietnam. He has authored a pistol-safety instruction course and holds pistol permits in the states of Connecticut and Florida. Photo courtesy of American News and Information Services.
About the rehearing, Edward Peruta told the Shooter’s Log, “This is what I want to say to the people of California and Hawaii and everyone else who lives in the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit: Quote, if this were the morning of Monday, December 8, 1941, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Unquote.” He explained that on December 8, 1941, the day after the attack on Pearl Harbor, everyone on the West Coast of the United States was looking for Japanese destroyers and aircraft, and that everyone wanted to be armed.

Peruta was brought on behalf of the California Rifle and Pistol Association (CRPA) Foundation and five individuals who were denied carry licenses by the San Diego Sheriff William D. Gore. In February 2014, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit hearing Peruta resulted in a monumental ruling that held that the San Diego County sheriff’s policy of refusing to issue licenses to carry firearms in public — unless an applicant could demonstrate a special need — was an unconstitutional violation of the Second Amendment.

After Sheriff Gore decided not to appeal the case further, state Attorney General Kamala Harris and several anti-gun groups filed requests to join the litigation and continue litigating the appeal as parties to the case. The three-judge panel denied each of the intervention requests. In December 2014, AG Harris and the anti-gun-rights groups filed requests for en banc review of the decision to deny them entry into the case.

Also in December 2014, at least one Ninth Circuit judge made a sua sponte (or on the Court’s own accord) request for all Ninth Circuit judges to vote on whether the Peruta case itself should be reheard en banc, regardless of whether AG Harris would be allowed to join the case.

The Court issued an order confirming that a majority of Ninth Circuit judges voted to rehear Peruta. The Court has set oral arguments for June 15, 2015. The Court also ordered that the related case of Richards v. Prieto, which was decided under the reasoning outlined in Peruta, will be heard along with the Peruta case on June 15.

No matter what happens as a result of the rehearing, either side will almost certainly petition a loss to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Here’s a question for gun owners to consider: Why would the Ninth want to rehear Peruta if a majority of the court’s  judges agreed with the initial ruling? Feel free to speculate below.

The Mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, The Shooter's Log, is to provide information—not opinions—to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (69)

  1. My CCW permit application in SJ county will take 12 months. Recently being confined to a wheel chair i lost the ability to retreat let alone defend myself in any confrontational situation.

    I decided i do not need to suffer the idiocy of the CA legislation that panders to illegals, criminals and those who wont work for a living.

    I moving to the USA which is east of the Sierras.

    Sayonara moonbeam and and your snowflake in Sacrapimento.

    1. Welcome to the real world of America. My wife and I moved out of The Peoples Republic of California 15 years ago this May. We had and still have family members who are radical Progressives and can’t understand why anyone would want to leave the State. One of them is PROUD to pay more and more in taxes!

      Anyway, good luck and I’m sure you’ll find a good place to land.

    2. Thanks, it looks like TN. Gas prices well below the people’s democracy of mexifornia, CCW costs and issue dates make CA unbelievable.
      People are true Americans an us immigrants (Australian) who entered legally are surely teed off with the current trend to open the floodgates of illegals.

      Sorry moonbeam, you and gavin (lower case intended) will be the cause of the implosion of the state. Read a little of Carl Marx to see a parallel.

  2. PLEASE Read it all:

    Passed by Congress September 25, 1789. Ratified December 15, 1791. The first 10 amendments form the Bill of Rights. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    bear1
    ber/
    verb
    1.
    (of a person) carry.
    “he was bearing a tray of brimming glasses”
    synonyms: carry, bring, transport, move, convey, take, fetch, deliver, tote, lug
    “I come bearing gifts”
    2.
    support.
    “walls that cannot bear a stone vault”
    synonyms: support, carry, hold up, prop up
    “will it bear his weight?”

    arms
    ärmz/Submit
    noun
    1.
    weapons and ammunition; armaments.
    “they were subjugated by force of arms”
    synonyms: weapons, weaponry, firearms, guns, ordnance, artillery, armaments, munitions, matériel
    “the illegal export of arms”
    2.
    distinctive emblems or devices, originally borne on shields in battle and now forming the heraldic insignia of families, corporations, or countries.
    synonyms: crest, emblem, coat of arms, heraldic device, insignia, escutcheon, shield
    “the family arms”

    How can a decision to inhibit a citizen to carry arms not an infringement on the second amendment? This is beyond my understanding. Take this as nothing more than the beginning of the disarmament of the people and the repeal of the second amendment to establish a defenseless society; were the criminals and terrorist will dictate how we should act.
    “When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”

    I don’t know who is credited with this quotation. Now it does stands to reason that if I can’t defend my self against tyranny from criminals I would not be able to render assistance to law enforcement for fear of retaliation. This is the worst case of oppression that can be brought against the people. We hear how it has worked in Australia and in England but these are two island states that are not bordered by land by any other countries that create a bridge easily crossed with ill intent for our communities.

    I understand that we have been experiencing loss of life in our country because of terrorist acts. This is the new war that we have been dragged into and one that will be with us for a long time. The casualties we are experiencing now are not more than the casualties we have had to endure in the name of freedom. We at this time should stand together and under stand that we as a nation should not surrender our liberties to suppress terrorism because that would be giving into terrorism. Our second amendment is not for sale nor is it on the negotiation table. We love our freedom we love our country and will defend them against hell or high water.

    I will tell on you if I see, hear, or smell you trying to harm my nation. I will because I have the right to bear arms.

    If you take this right away from us I must surrender my nation to the criminals because there will be none protect it. As a nation we are and all ways will be unbeatable, because we love our constitutional freedoms and to surrender any freedom in the name of safety is un-American and weak.

    I for one am neither un-American nor weak and I will protect my constitutional rights tooth and nail.

    1. This is the problem. A law that is clearly anti-Constitution is still legal until challenged in court. And in this day, it appears that the court is resistant to grant that you have standing to challenge a law unless you have been charged with a violation of it!

  3. They are all DEMOCRATS. That’s why the 9th took it upon themselves to give the middle finger the California AG. Then they asked themselves. WWOD (What would Obama do?)

  4. I have ALWAYS criticized the NRA for using the expression, “law abiding citizen.” People are finally waking-up to understand my complaint!

  5. I have a CCW permit in process in Orange County, California. This morning I heard from the OC Deputy who is handling my case:

    “Good morning, the Peruta v. County of San Diego panel decision has been withdrawn by a decision to rehear the case en banc in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Applicants currently in the process, will be required to articulate their safety concerns and provide supporting documentation in accordance with the Orange County Sheriff’s Department’s (OCSD) Policy 218. Each application will be evaluated individually based on the merits of the applicant’s good cause statement and the totality of their circumstances. Please refer to the attached document checklist for some examples.”

    You can look up Policy 218 on the Internet. Basically it says you need to show cause: transportation of valuable property or cash, victim of a crime, before you can be issued a CCW permit.

    In a couple of years things will probably be a lot better after the full 9th court hears this and, if necessary, it is appealed to the Supreme Court. Then it will apply to courts all over the land, not just to the 9th, if the Supreme Court has to hear it. But for the moment, CCW just became more difficult in California.

  6. Q
    Does that star-spangled banner yet wave o’er the land of the free, and the home of the brave?
    A
    No.

  7. It’s California, you know, the shining star of the left coast. Need anyone say more? Logic, data, and common sense do not apply there.

  8. The term law-abiding citizen is falling by the wayside, especially here behind enemy lines in Kommiecticut (as well as NY, NJ, MD,CO, WA, and coming soon to OR). We are now known as “peaceable citizens”, because many of us Patriots are participating in the armed civil disobedience of non-compliance. By the stoke of a pen on a piece of paper, potentially a few hundred thousand felons were created out of thin air. Those folks are not violent criminal thugs, just good people exercising their Second Amendment Rights as granted by their birth. An out of control state government seems to think otherwise. So….law abiding….technically not any more, but certainly peaceable. Unless force is used to try and ensure compliance, these Patriots won’t fire a shot.

  9. As I said above to slowrno 43 about gun control.
    Let me take it a step further. As I see it, this government we have in power at this time wants to make this country into a Social State.
    Let me explain. It takes eight levels of control you must obtain before you are able to create a social state. The first being the most important.
    1) HEALTHCARE:Control healthcare and you control the people.
    2) POVERTY: Increase the poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.
    3) DEBT: Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes and this will produce more poverty.
    4) GUN CONTROL: Remove the ability to defend themselves from the government. That way you are able to create a police state.
    5) WELFARE: Take control of every aspect of their lives ( Food, housing and income).
    6) EDUCATION: Take control of what people read and listen to, you take control of of what children learn in school.
    7) RELIGION: Remove the belief in God from government and schools.
    8) CLASS WARFARE: Divide the people into the weathy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take ( TAX ) the wealthy with the support of the poor.
    Does any or all of this sound familiar?
    Once you have accomplished all eight, you end up with a nation of lambs being lead to slaughter. This originated in Russia with Vladimir Lenin. Then onto Germany with Hitler. NOW guess where!!!

    1. Refuse to follow the laws against the 2nd Amendment, time to coup this Tyrannical government then deport liberals, muslims, invading illegal aliens and replace all politicians with US Patriots! Obama the Kenyan Native Muslim has no say he must be deleted from US History!

  10. This is really sad as the courts throughout the land of America have been bought and paid for by an “administration” that is against AMERICAN beliefs and do not represent true Americans.

  11. Does the AG mean that she will make sure that the bad guys all turn in their guns or just the peaceable people who are defending themselves?

  12. I live in Oakland,ca and im probably the only person not carrying a gun… why? Because I obey the law. Whats wrong with this picture???

    1. Mark,

      We would welcome even more law abiding people like you choosing to live in Texas. 🙂 More importantly, though, California really needs people like you now more than ever to continue obeying laws and *voting* to elect officials who will legislate in a manner congruent with the US Constitution.

      I love your State’s beauty and your State’s weather, but I will never move to California unless or until gun rights of individuals are restored.

      I wish you all the best, Mark.

  13. Obama must have gotten hold of these judges and threatened to take away their black robes if they didn’t play his communist game imo

  14. I have yet to hear of a felon obeying firearms laws. Who is expected to obey? Well, just law abiding taxpayers and voters like me. Let’s exclude the thugs, dopeheads, crazies, and repeat felons from all gun laws. In fact confiscate all OUR guns and ammo and give it to them. A new federal benefit program!

  15. Why, indeed, would they want to rehear the case?
    The reality is that the court system in the US is no longer working for the people. The courts have now become the ally to special interests. It behooves the up and coming to be on the right side, and unfortunately, that comes back to wealth and power, no longer the “peoples’ will”. As the checks and balances system that has been so important to the wealth and stability of the US has faltered at the government level, the perversion of the court system has not fallen behind.
    The reality, in most cases, is that if you have the funding, you will be triumphant simply by starving the other side out, or simply outlasting the current tide of opinion, whatever that might be.
    Our infrastructure is crumbling. Leaving of education to beaurocrats rather than educators means we are no longer serving our children. Ineptitude and mediocrity are now the norm of our education system.
    Police are underfunded, outgunned and their hands tied. One minute they are saviors, the next they are the enemy.
    We make fun of Mexico and other countries. Our judicial system has become every bit as corrupt and ineffectual for the public good as anywhere else. We are slowly meandering down the path to just another third world country. Slowly eroding freedoms, taking away the ability to resist. We, as a country, are already a long way down that slippery slope with very little substance to hold onto on the way down.
    Then you ask why they want to rehear the case. Really??????

  16. The simple fact that the 9th Circus court, (the most overturned circuit court in history), decided to re-hear the case means that the decision to uphold the lower court has already been made. Otherwise, there would have been no need to re-hear it en banc. The proceedings will be nothing more than a formality, and a bad joke at gun owners’ expense.

  17. Why reheard? Because of big money pressure and threats from progressives. Feistein may be involved. Who else would go against our Constitutional Rights?

  18. I am an honorable discharged veteran, I passed the national board for funeral director & embalmers, a licensed locksmith, so the government has my prints everywhere. Our gun rights are for , WE, the people. Every law passed against us, is another wedge in the log. I know of no legal gun owners committing crimes. They don’t prosecute the BAD, people at all. Sure they lock them up, give them free medical & dental, internet access, weights, 3 squares a day, etc. We need to pass laws against those that abuse it, not against those of us trying to obey it & protect it.

  19. Odd how a ruling on gays seems to be set in stone but rulings on our constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms is often ignored and dismissed by those self-righteous anti-gunners.

    1. When those in office go against the people who put them in office. Its time to get them out of office..Use the Vote with enough votes you can make changes. First go out in your home town with patations get every one you can , to sign that’s the first step to make change. Sorry for all the mistakes this lap top is very old. Ill write again, Mike

  20. I predict that this administration is going to push the American Citizen to far when it comes to our rights and our natural right to protect ourselves from a Tyrannical Government that steps all over the Constitution and leaves us no alternative, but to fight. Private Militia’s all over the USA are growing and arming themselves with powerful weapons just in case all hell breaks loose. 70% of the Marines will come home and protect their community and family. Hoora!

  21. Wow sounds like we need some help here! I’m not sure where every one else stands and maybe I am wrong but I believe that the N.R.A. is one of our biggest allies in this gun fight. Now here is my recommendation, pick the outfit you think is best suited to voice your opinion and send them some of your hard earned money so they can muster a defense for your benefit. Then get busy and wright your congress and govt. officials to let them know where you stand. Please don’t sit on your hands and wait for someone else to do it for you.
    That’s all I have to say on this topic.

    1. Supporting the NRA is great. I am a life member. But the NRA and others like it can only do so much. When your fighting congress, with the president backing them with his executive power of pen, it a real tough nut to crack. Wrighting your congress person is good! But most of them do what is most profitable for them. What do they care. They retire with the worlds best pension.
      The best question I can put to you is ” How do the minority of people seem to have the biggest voice?” Reason, They are backed by BILLIONAIRS that want to control the people of this once great nation by taking away their rights. Gun control, the removal of all firearms, leaves you and me without a means of self defence against an intruder weather it be in your home or in our country.
      Look out come Sept. 2015.

  22. The Constitution and the Second Amendment was always intended to take the issue of gun rights away from the scope of the Federal Government. That is, in fact, the basic premise of our Constitution. Unlike that of other governments, ours does not grant rights to the Citizens. Rather, it presumes that those rights intrinsically belong to the People, and instead establishes very strict controls on the authority of Government to muck with those rights.

    Unfortunately, if you look at the history of the Second Amendment cases heard by the Supreme Court and read the decisions, (there actually aren’t very many) you will be amazed at the circuitous or just plain wrong logic that is employed to allow Government to weasel it’s way into controlling what the Connie says it has no jurisdiction over. Even the 2008 Heller decision, which is regarded as a victory for gun rights, actually isn’t much of a victory at all. It perpetuates unjustifiable and wrong notions, such as the assertion in the majority opinion that the only types of firearms protected by the Amendment are those widely available and in common use by the public. This innocuous little phrase opens up a whole avenue for bureaucrats and politicians to pursue gun control. Further, that same case leaves the door open for States to regulate firearms. This is ludicrous. Long-standing law in the US says that the States must be consistent with the Constitution. The States can’t take away Constitutionally protected rights, but apparently they can when guns are involved. As a while the Government and the Courts think it is all just dandy. Well, it’s not dandy. It’s unconstitutional, and all these people – every one of them – is an enemy and traitor to the Country. Concealed carry is clearly a right, just like voting or free speech or any other right. The Government is precluded by one of the shortest and most direct amendments to the Constitution, only 27 words, from doing anything to infringe that right. There is a process to change our Constitution, which actually includes a couple of different avenues to change…. but nonsense interpretation and unjustifiable assumption of authority is not one of them

    1. “Rather, it presumes that those rights intrinsically belong to the People, and instead establishes very strict controls on the authority of Government to muck with those rights.”

      Great point!! Just wish more politicians believed it.

    2. The Bill of Rights and U.S. Constitution are merely ink on paper. Every evil despot and tyrannical dictator throughout history has had espoused some wonderful sounding ink on paper. What do you expect? It’s only ink!

      As Benjamin Franklin reported to Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia after the Constitutional Convention of 1787, it’s “a republic, if you can keep it!”

      The people have not kept it.

  23. It seems to me that deciding to rehear a case in which there was no challenge to the decision is an admission of a mistake. So if the judicial error was so egregious that the same court decides to rehear the case, I would suggest a change of venue should be required.

  24. I certainly hope there is no uprising…. remember the current administration houses the US military commander and chief. The last census I am aware of indicated half our military personnel would engage US citizens with lethal force if commanded to do so. With even half our military capabilities, it would be a blood bath for the citizens. I will stand and fight for my Constitutional and God given rights, but to say the very least, if it comes to that, We The People are going to take a serious hit.

    1. BTW….Refer to the University of Hawaii, Democide Web page. Between 1900-1999, 350+ million unarmed and government disarmed citizens have been Slaughtered by their own governments. The USA is headed toward that in a big way.

    2. larry, I don’t believe that 1/2 the military will support the government in any sort of popular uprising. Persons in the military *have* to answer that way, because they don’t trust that their responses are anonymous…. and for good reason. Big Brother, to paraphrase Orwell, is indeed watching.

      I have family members in the military currently and from what they tell me, all this gun control nonsense has no support within the military. When push comes to shove, and let’s hope it never does, these guys are not going to shoot mom and dad. I will bet my life on that.

      The Government knows it, too. That’s why they are so committed to gun control. No military, not even ours at 100% capacity, would have a chance against 100 million armed citizens. You can count on those American Citizens to stand up to the Government if ever Washington was to be so foolish as to actually wage war on us.

    3. Sorry to be a naysayer, but they have been actually waging war successfully against us for many decades now. Perhaps a seemingly ‘kinder, gentler’ war, but a war nonetheless. And a war that they have already won. Any concept of ‘citizen’s rights’ was crushed long ago. We have no rights whatsoever. The charade court decisions supposedly upholding citizen’s rights (like the meaningless second amendment ruling that they continue to disregard at their whim) are obviously choreographed to lull us into thinking we have some shred of hope, only because it suits their purpose for us to think that.
      We can do absolutely nothing without their consent.
      Any attempt at any sort of citizen uprising would be squashed like a bug quicker than we can possibly imagine.
      Just sayin’.

    4. Anthony:

      What gives freedom a chance is not 100 million armed citizens, what does is 100 million WILLING armed citizens. I have a feeling that this is what our forefathers were really talking about back in the time in which that willingness had just been well demonstrated.

      Guns alone are just inanimate objects and they, therefore, can neither be blamed for bad deeds nor relied upon for good ones.

      But, I’m sure everyone here knew that already…

    5. Citizens are not organized, and the bumma is dividing them more and more every day. Gays versus straights, blacks and every other race against whites, muzz and athiest pigs against Christians, women against men, etc… Meanwhile, they community-organize their commies and unions, welfare takers, and illegal immigrants, la ratza etc. Meanwhile poor little PC-oppressed normal American citizens just want peaceful times, but the bumma regime is bringing in foreigners en mass to fundamentally change our peaceful little America. .

  25. It really is sad when these liberal courts drag the cases on and on until they get the ruling they want. Anarchy is really what the control people want, then the people will unknowingly want a dictator to bring back order to society. Remember Hitler was voted in by the people of Germany to fix the problems of Germany.

    1. I think we are very near an uprising against the government,

      that’s why the people are still arming themselves after years.

  26. America is already at the stage I call “controlled anarchy.” Controlled by the massive penetration of progressives into the Federal and State courts and bureaucracy. No matter what happens the evil control goons will continue to push for a totalitarian State that controls our lives in the minutest detail. For proof of this you only have to look at the absolute mountain of Federal and State regulations that outline in the tiniest detail EXACTLY what they want done; and where; and when; and what you have to wear when you are doing it!

  27. When courts decide not to rule as the Constitution says

    but as they choose to interpret, they lead a country

    into ANARCHY.

  28. Concealed carry is of no use to me, I don’t carry a purse. Besides, Open Carry is the right guaranteed by the Constitution, concealed carry can be banned.

    http://CaliforniaRightToCarry.org

    “[A] right to carry arms openly: “This is the right guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, and which is calculated to incite men to a manly and noble defence of themselves, if necessary, and of their country, without any tendency to secret advantages and unmanly assassinations.”” District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S. Ct. 2783 (2008) at 2809

    “[T]he right of the people to keep and bear arms (art. 2) is not infringed by laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons…” Robertson v. Baldwin, 165 US 275 – Supreme Court (1897) at 282.

    “In Nunn v. State, 1 Ga. 243, 251 (1846), the Georgia Supreme Court construed the Second Amendment as protecting the “natural right of self-defence” and therefore struck down a ban on carrying pistols openly. Its opinion perfectly captured the way in which the operative clause of the Second Amendment furthers the purpose announced in the prefatory clause, in continuity with the English right…Likewise, in State v. Chandler, 5 La. Ann. 489, 490 (1850), the Louisiana Supreme Court held that citizens had a right to carry arms openly: “This is the right guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, and which is calculated to incite men to a manly and noble defence of themselves, if necessary, and of their country, without any tendency to secret advantages and unmanly assassinations.”” District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S. Ct. 2783 (2008) at 2809

    “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. See, e.g., Sheldon, in 5 Blume 346; Rawle 123; Pomeroy 152-153; Abbott 333. For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues. See, e.g., State v. Chandler, 5 La. Ann., at 489-490; Nunn v. State, 1 Ga., at 251…” District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S. Ct. 2783 (2008) at 2816

  29. If I was sitting on the Ninth Circuit I would vote for rehearing the case in front of the full board. My reason? I think this is a fairly straight-forward case that needs to be won in front of the biggest court with the most judges as possible.

    We have a lot of pro-individual rights speakers who are gaining attention and who will help sway public and judicial opinion. Since possession of Heroin and Meth are misdemeanors in California now, if someone wants to make a law saying people convicted of a misdemeanor are ineligible to own a guy, it would probably pass a judicial review. But to say that no one may bear a concealed weapon without showing special cause–many will try, but I do not think it can pass the muster in 2015.

  30. Not that many were appointed by O’bama. Six or seven maybe. About the same for George W. I think Clinton actually appointed more than anyone else.

  31. WHY would the 9th Circus Court want to rehear the case? You’ve got to be kidding! How about pressure from the anti-gun goons, led by Kommie Kamela herself. Justice has nothing to do with 2A; it has all to do with governmental power and how many anti-gun goons will vote for old Kamela when she runs for Governor. It’s all about votes and how much taxpayer money can be pumped into the anti-gun fray……the Constitution be damned, according to Harris.

    Remember that government money always trumps the amount of money the CRPA can bring in to pay for litigation, and in this case, Kamela Harris holds some long purse strings, payed for by the taxpayers, of course.

  32. The government did not like the ruling from one court so it gets to shop around to find a court that will agree with the president’s anti gun agenda. It would be interesting to see how many of those new judges were appointed under the Obama regime.

  33. 2nd Amendment is just that, piss on the executive orders and all the crap along with them. Heard once was enough. It’s time they leave us law abiding citizens the hell alone.

  34. Obama has packed the Ninth with fellow socialist that is the reason for the rehearing! Give’em hell Mr. Peruta!!

  35. How many judges have been appointed by Obama in the Ninth Circuit?

    I’ll bet you’ll find your answer there. He’s packed the Ninth Circuit with his appointees and he now wants a re-hearing.

    1. This ruling will probably end up in the Supreme Court of the U.S.A….What worries me, that the Supreme Court will not hear it and let the Ninth Circuit
      ruling stand, which will be bad for gun owners, as they the majority are liberals.

    2. Good point! Remember that the 9th sits in San Francisco, and don’t tell me that ultra-liberal far-left San Francisco politics doesn’t rub off on these judges. I know that they are supposed to rule according to the Constitution, but if that were really the case, such legal nonsense would not even be an issue. As a result, the fight goes on and on and on.

      I live sixty miles north of SF, and I hate to even visit the place; I leave that to the tourists. The city’s rental rates per square foot for business space is twice that of the East Bay (largely Oakland), yet the city fathers expect businesses to flock there; of course, they have no more business sense than our cat, but the city residents still vote to keep them in office.

    3. Hey Smitty, I used to have a cat with WAY more sense than most politicians, certainly more than any of the Libs! An example: when confronted by any attack, he fought back, no holds barred. He ran a German Shepherd off once!

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit exceeded. Please click the reload button and complete the captcha once again.

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.