Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Berzon had a unique Supreme Court litigation practice and litigated many of the landmark cases during that period, including UAW v. Johnson Controls, 499 U.S. 187 (1991). Berzon was also a lecturer at UC Berkeley in 1992 and a practitioner-in-residence at Cornell Law School in 1994.
Judge Benitez once again ruled that the California ban is unconstitutional [61] after the Ninth Circuit remanded the case back down to the district in light of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. [62] The case has since been held in abeyance pending the decision of the En Banc Court in 'Duncan v. Bonta'
One of these dissents was in Duncan v. Bonta , a challenge to a California law that limits gun magazine capacity to 10 bullets. The en banc panel upheld the law, and VanDyke accused the majority of "distrust[ing] gun owners and think[ing] the Second Amendment is a vestigial organ of their living constitution" and having an "undefeated, 50–0 ...
A coalition of 14 attorneys general, led by Bonta and New York Atty. Gen. Letitia James, filed separate enforcement actions against the Chinese-owned app that serves as a platform for influencers ...
California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said he and his staff have been reviewing former President Trump's second-term agenda in detail to prepare a potential onslaught of environmental, immigration and ...
Miller v. Bonta; Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Full case name: James Miller, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Rob Bonta, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of California, et al., Defendants : Citation: 19-cv-1537-BEN (JLB) Case history; Prior actions: Miller v.
The appeal was assigned to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which, in an unprecedented manner, called for an en-banc review of the State of California's appeal to Benitez's ruling in Duncan v. Bonta, opting out of the traditional three-judge panel review process of previous appeals. California Governor Gavin Newsom issued a post on the social ...
Mabel Duncan et al. v. the United States 597 F.2d 1337 found 18 April 1979 that the US government was liable for tribal damages. [41] On 2 December 1981 the judge confirmed federal liability for damages in Mabel Duncan et al. v. the United States 667 F.2d 36. [42] After the 1977 ruling, 153.22 acres of land were restored to the tribal trust. [6 ...