Paladin:
What is going on with Peruta? Has is this going to be heard enbanc.
Seems like it is just hanging out there.
Getting OT, but since no one seems to know what, if anything, is happening w/
Pantano....
Peruta was decided by a 3-judge panel of CA9 last Valentine's Day. Our side won in a very solidly written opinion, w/2 judges agreeing and 1 disagreeing. San Diego (defendant), said they would not appeal.
After it was decided, CA AG Kamala Harris -- who had been invited to join the litigation much earlier, but declined -- suddenly changed her mind and decided she
does want to get in the middle of this fight and motioned CA9 to allow her to "intervene" in order to then ask the 3-judge panel to rehear the case or for CA9 to rehear it
en banc.
That's where we stand and have stood since the end of Feb....
But, the
Peruta decision has already had some positive effects. Orange, Ventura, and San Joaquin counties have all switched to accepting mere "self-defense"/"personal protection" as sufficient "Good Cause" for getting a CCW. They've got populations of 3M, 800k, and 700k respectively. (For comparison, the population of the entire state of DE is 900k.) Several other counties (representing 17.3M),
are accepting apps w/SD = GC, but are holding them pending "finalization", as it is called, of the
Peruta decision.
Peruta was also a major influence on the trial court's opinion in
Palmer -- the Carry case out of Wash D.C. that's been at the trial court level for some 5 years. Our side won and D.C. just passed a highly restrictive "May Issue" law and must decide later this month if they want to appeal the decision.
For those who care, you can keep up w/the
Palmer filings at:
https://ia902305.us.archive.org/14/items/gov.uscourts.dcd.137887/gov.uscourts.dcd.137887.docket.html