In California: Judge strikes down magazine ban
The right to bear arms includes the right to keep and carry ammunition and magazines holding more than 10 rounds for those arms, for both self-defense and to be ready to serve in a militia
Good. And also there’s this:
Disarming Californias law-abiding citizens is not a constitutionally permissible policy choice
I like this guy.
June 30th, 2017 at 6:27 pm
Damn straight. Sooner or later, you have to punch back.
June 30th, 2017 at 6:48 pm
A judge who, in this case at least, didn’t violate his Oath! Excellent!
June 30th, 2017 at 6:49 pm
In other news; it is news when a judge upholds the constitution as promised.
June 30th, 2017 at 7:15 pm
It’s just an injunction.
The injunction at David Hardy’s site
armsandthelaw.com/archives/2017/06/federal_judge_e.php
July 1st, 2017 at 1:42 am
WOW! A Kalifornistan judge who actually understands and upholds the Constitution that he swore a oath to uphold.
Call me mindboggled.
July 1st, 2017 at 10:16 am
So when this hits the 9th Circuit, they will have the clear choice of “the voters supported this” versus “this is not a constitutionally permissible policy choice.”
Gee, I wonder which way the 9th will decide?
July 1st, 2017 at 2:22 pm
Since when has the 9th Circus ever supported what the voters want or upheld the COTUS?
July 6th, 2017 at 1:33 pm
Finally! A judge that understands the Constitution!
July 7th, 2017 at 12:21 pm
Not only will the 9th overturn but the Supremes will do nothing again. Thank you John Roberts.