Judge Requests Supreme Court Action on Gun Rulings

Judge Lawrence VanDyke of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit is seeking a strong response from the U.S. Supreme Court regarding his court’s gun law decisions.

He wants the Supreme Court to overturn what he describes as the 9th Circuit’s misguided Second Amendment rulings that have upheld California’s gun regulations.

VanDyke expressed, “To put it more colloquially, it’s time for a bench slap. Nothing will really open the door for this court until it starts approving all the arms limitations it reviews.”

He pointed out the need for caution, remarking that the 9th Circuit has a troubling history of ignoring Second Amendment protections.

These comments came while dissenting from the court’s choice not to revisit its ruling that supports a California law limiting the concealed carry of switchblades.

He suggested that a “bench slap” could be phrased as follows:

Dear members of the lower courts,

Your decision is the worst… So poor that it doesn’t deserve further examination.

Please reconsider.

Thank you.

Supreme Court.

After facing criticism for his informal language, VanDyke responded, “Let me soften my colleague’s selective Victorian tastes. Calm down.”

Recently, it was reported that he published a video dissenting from the 9th Circuit’s decision in Duncan vs. Bonta, where the majority concluded that magazines capable of holding over 10 rounds aren’t weapons protected under the Second Amendment.

In his video dissent, he noted:

California accepts that a magazine is vital for a firearm’s operation, but argues that since a standard magazine can be substituted with a low-capacity version, these high-capacity magazines aren’t protected.

He cautioned that such reasoning could potentially undermine rights related to numerous firearm components, implying that very few firearms would be considered fully protected under the Second Amendment.