What, You Mean The Communists Don’t Get To Go Judge Shopping To Defend Gun Control In California?
BY Herschel Smith
4 years, 1 month ago
A U.S. District Judge in San Diego who has issued rulings in two separate lawsuits challenging California’s strict gun control measures will take up another weapons-related case on Monday, sparking criticism from gun-control groups who pro-gun advocates have been given an unfair advantage.
Judge Roger Benitez has twice ruled in favor of gun rights: in a case that challenged California’s ban of high-capacity magazines, and another case mandating background checks for buying ammunition, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported.
On Monday, he will oversee a case challenging several state laws regulating and defining assault weapons. He is overseeing another case challenging the state’s prohibition on owning batons, billy clubs, and blackjacks.
As a federal judge, Benitez’s rulings affect broad swaths of the west and could have broader implications for the rest of the country should the U.S. Supreme Court – now on the very of a solid 6-3 conservative majority – take up a major Second Amendment case.
Gun control groups have questioned how Benitez, a pro-Second Amendment judge, has been able to see so many cases involving gun rights. Their scrutiny has drawn attention to an obscure “related case” rule that allows one party in a lawsuit to file cases in certain districts if the issues at hand involve “the same or substantially identical questions of law” as those in another case.
All federal courts have this rule. But San Diego is unique in that an opposing side in a case cannot challenge or object to the transfer. Gun control groups maintain that this allows gun rights organizations to go judge shopping: knowing that they will have a more favorable ruling with Benitez than virtually any other federal judge in California. Gun rights groups have disputed this, pointing out that they have other Second Amendment cases in other jurisdictions.
So 2A groups followed the rules, actually get a constitutional judge, and the communists are livid that they don’t get to tinker with the process themselves.
How sad for them. Poor babies. They do it when it pleases them, and complain when lawyers seek the best remedy for their enemies by finding a judge who happens to respect God-given rights.
Color me unmoved.
On October 19, 2020 at 10:55 am, Fred said:
In the interest of facts: the court is 1 to 8 conservative. The others are 8 progressive pro State abortionists among other wickedness that they support.
On October 19, 2020 at 12:47 pm, Brad said:
Thank you President Trump.
On October 19, 2020 at 12:54 pm, Brad said:
Here are the facts, Trump has flipped the 9th.
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-02-22/trump-conservative-judges-9th-circuit
On October 19, 2020 at 3:10 pm, Levi Garrett said:
It’s a sad thing that people have to place so much hope in having the “right” judges in place so their side gets a favorable decision. I get frustrated, for example, when people talk about how important it is to have their guy elected so he can appoint/nominate a “conservative” judge. How wrong is it that we even have to worry about losing our freedoms based upon who wears the black robe and holds the big wooden mallet? I’m tired of the “our team vs. their team” mentality that pervades American politics. It’s too much to ask that judges make righteous judgements, I guess.