craigj532 said:
... holds that the Second Amendment protects the right to openly carry arms outside the home for self-defense and strikes down Hawaii’s place to keep laws. I’m sure there will eventually be an en banc review.
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/07/24/12-17808.pdf
PS - Dissenting judge was a G.W. Bush appointee.
Liberal 9th is still very much the liberal 9th. If you doubt it, just wait and see what happens when it goes en banc.
Remember, Sydney Thomas is still Chief Judge, and he is extremely opposed to the existence of civil rights under the Second Amendment.
So it's not really a significant decision, in that it won't endure. It was a dream panel, just a statistical anomaly that the only 2 originalists in a circuit court of 20+ judges ended up on the same panel, and one of them happened to be the same judge who wrote the majority opinion in
Peruta, before Thomas overturned that decision en banc.
So until the 9th can overturn this decision, all that will happen is Hawaii will say, "Sure, open carry is legal for all citizens, as long as they pass a basic public safety test (consisting of 16 years of training, $142,000 dollars in fees, and completing a written exam (written in Aramaic) of 58,000 questions with a score of 99.99999999999% or better. PS, there may be a 71 year delay in processing applications, thanks for your kokua in advance."
So Hawaii can then claim they have open carry for all citizens, but nobody can get a permit (same as now), the twist being that you have to start a new case to challenge the "perfunctory" requirements for the safety test.
While that roadblock is working, the 9th will take
Young en banc, and overturn it. That will eliminate Hawaii's problem, so they can scrap their safety test, and go back to the old way of saying 'no'.
Young or
Flanagan (similar case, just challenging a CA law instead of a HI law, which will also die when the 9th overturns
Young) will petition for cert, and the big question becomes, now that Kennedy is gone, is SCOTUS interested in protecting 2A civil rights once again, and even if they are, are they ready to deal with carry?
Most of the focus will be on Roberts, he might have been the problem, rather than Kennedy, why SCOTUS took no 2A cases (firearms cases, and
McDonald doesn't count) over the last decade.