The Brady bunch and their minions are already calling for an en banc review. In the 9th Circuit there are 29 active judges, but only 11 are seated for an en banc review. The makeup of the 11 would probably go a long way toward the ultimate decision, and there is no doubt in my mind that either way it will be appealed to SCOTUS.Jumping Frog wrote:Let's hope not. A rehearing en banc requires a majority vote of all the judges in the Ninth Circuit in regular active service. It is specifically disfavored:ELB wrote:OH, THE HORROR!
A commenter suggests that the Ninth Circuit may be interested in taking the right-to-carry-guns decision en banc — i.e., reviewing the case using an 11-judge panel — because
Turning San Francisco into San Antonio is not something any court is going to want to do lightly.
From The Volokh Conspiracy blog.
Fed. R. App. P. 35(a).An en banc hearing or rehearing is not favored and ordinarily will not be ordered unless:
(1) en banc consideration is necessary to secure or maintain uniformity of the court's decisions; or
(2) the proceeding involves a question of exceptional importance.
Of course, some of the Ninth Circuit wackos will likely view this as "a question of exceptional importance".
I remember hearing or seeing that Justice Thomas would do the selection of the en banc panel in the 9th Circuit, but I cannot find the reference and wonder if someone else could confirm or deny that for me.
And considering the differences between the various Circuits, it looks to me as if this one might be a fine case to take to SCOTUS as they have already essentially ruled that self-defense is a right, and all this does is recognize that that right exists outside the home.