Updates in California Magazine Ban and 3D Printing Cases in Today's FPC Daily 2A Legal Update
In today's FPC legal update, we have updates from a case challenging California's magazine ban a case about 3D-printing.
Duncan v. Bonta
Issue: Magazine ban
Court: Ninth Circuit
Action: Oral arguments
Oral arguments were held at the Ninth Circuit in a lawsuit challenging California's law banning magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. While the plaintiffs in this case originally won at the district court and at a 3-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit, the circuit decided in February to rehear the case en banc, which means it will be argued again before an 11-judge panel. Most of the judges asked questions of each side during the arguments, focusing on topics such as the standard of review that should be used, how popular the banned magazines are, what evidence was previously filed in the case regarding crimes with magazines, and whether the state can ban the ownership of previously-grandfathered magazines. FPC filed a brief in this case earlier this year in opposition to California's ban, which you can read here. The next update in this case will likely be the ruling, which could take months.
Defense Distributed v. Grewal
Issue: 3D-printed guns/files
Court: Fifth Circuit
Action: Reply in support of motion for preliminary injunction
In this lawsuit challenging New Jersey's restrictions on 3D-printed gun files, the plaintiffs challenging the ban filed a reply in support of their motion to enjoin the law (which would prevent the state from enforcing it.) The brief argues that New Jersey Attorney General Grewal is using "procedural gamesmanship" while the plaintiffs "have chased Grewal from one court to another and another and another, all in an effort to enjoin the same unconstitutional censorship." The Plaintiffs' brief also argues that they are likely to win on the merits of their lawsuit and that they "would have prosecuted the instant action even more quickly than they did" if not for the delays the Attorney General previously caused. The court will now make a decision on the motion, which could happen at any time.