Author Topic: Nguyen v. Bonta. 1 in 30 purchase limit. Stay is vacated  (Read 1118 times)

Offline PeteButtigieg

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Karma: +0/-3
    • View Profile
Nguyen v. Bonta. 1 in 30 purchase limit. Stay is vacated
« on: August 15, 2024, 07:53:33 PM »
The 9th circuit vacated the stay today on the district court's earlier judgement which found that PC 27535 and 27540(f) (the 1 in 30 laws) were unconstitutional.

https://www.firearmspolicy.org/nguyen

WooHoo!

ETA:  Apparently the oral arguments were a complete disaster for the State.
« Last Edit: August 15, 2024, 07:58:32 PM by PeteButtigieg »

Offline One-eyed-jack

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Nguyen v. Bonta. 1 in 30 purchase limit. Stay is vacated
« Reply #1 on: August 15, 2024, 09:17:02 PM »
The hearing isn't very long. It's pretty entertaining watching the states attorney trying to sidestep the judge's logical questions.

https://youtu.be/sv9RXRqKfLU

Offline Silence Dogood

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
  • Karma: +10/-8
    • View Profile
Re: Nguyen v. Bonta. 1 in 30 purchase limit. Stay is vacated
« Reply #2 on: August 16, 2024, 03:25:04 PM »
Chuck Michel offers guidance to FFLs completing a multiple firearm transaction:
Quote
On August 15, 2024, a Ninth Circuit panel lifted the stay on the district court’s injunction in Nguyen v. Bonta, a case challenging California’s law that limited individuals to one gun purchase per 30 days. The district court had ruled the law unconstitutional, but the Ninth Circuit promptly stayed that judgment pending appeal. Now, the panel handling the case has revoked that prior stay, and the district court’s order is thus in full effect while the panel prepares its written ruling.
As the district court’s judgment is back in effect, that means that, as the district court had ordered on March 28, 2024, “California Penal Code sections 27535 and 27540(f), and Defendants’ enforcement policies, practices, customs, and actions related to enforcement of California Penal Code sections 27535 and 27540(f), violate the right to keep and bear arms protected under the Second and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.” The district court also barred the Attorney General, the Director of the Bureau of Firearms, and their subordinates from enforcing those sections of the Penal Code. (Note that this does not affect the ten-day waiting period for picking up purchased firearms).
Going forward, this means that dealers need not limit customers to one gun purchase per 30 days. To go about this in the DROS Entry System, dealers should select “dealer handgun sale” as the transaction. Then, enter all of the relevant information as normal. After that, select the “30-Day Restriction Exemption” box, then select any of the pop-up options (it doesn’t matter which option as the law is enjoined). In the “Comments” field, enter “PC 27535 & 27540(f) enjoined pursuant to court order in Nguyen v. Bonta”. Finally, submit and process the transaction as normal.
https://x.com/CRPAPresident/status/1824565982339428500

Offline PeteButtigieg

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Karma: +0/-3
    • View Profile
Re: Nguyen v. Bonta. 1 in 30 purchase limit. Stay is vacated
« Reply #3 on: August 16, 2024, 03:41:21 PM »
Chuck Michel offers guidance to FFLs completing a multiple firearm transaction:
...
https://x.com/CRPAPresident/status/1824565982339428500

Well that is good news, but it would have been even better if he told us all to go down and attempt to buy two guns, get denied, then join a mass lawsuit against the state for civil rights violation.

Offline Silence Dogood

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
  • Karma: +10/-8
    • View Profile
Re: Nguyen v. Bonta. 1 in 30 purchase limit. Stay is vacated
« Reply #4 on: August 16, 2024, 03:45:01 PM »
Chuck Michel offers guidance to FFLs completing a multiple firearm transaction:
...
https://x.com/CRPAPresident/status/1824565982339428500

Well that is good news, but it would have been even better if he told us all to go down and attempt to buy two guns, get denied, then join a mass lawsuit against the state for civil rights violation.

And better still but for the 11% FET horse-scat.

Offline TheGood

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 282
  • Karma: +2/-14
    • View Profile
Re: Nguyen v. Bonta. 1 in 30 purchase limit. Stay is vacated
« Reply #5 on: August 16, 2024, 05:50:23 PM »
Chuck Michel offers guidance to FFLs completing a multiple firearm transaction:
...
https://x.com/CRPAPresident/status/1824565982339428500

Well that is good news, but it would have been even better if he told us all to go down and attempt to buy two guns, get denied, then join a mass lawsuit against the state for civil rights violation.

And better still but for the 11% FET horse-scat.

And now they'll get more money to draft/fight other unconstitutional laws because of the higher turnover at DROS.   ::)
Next to go down is the 10 day wait...

Offline GoodGear

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • 657-223-3283
    • View Profile
Re: Nguyen v. Bonta. 1 in 30 purchase limit. Stay is vacated
« Reply #6 on: October 13, 2024, 10:12:26 AM »
OUTSTANDING!