Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Ivan Pena, et al. v. Martin Horan, Director, California Department of Justice Bureau of Firearms
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 15-15449 · judgment August 3, 2018
Before the decision, about 2.2× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a Ninth Circuit decision below, a circuit split argued in the petition, and a dissent in the court below (flagged in the petition).
Question presented
California generally makes handguns unavailable, except those “determine[d]” to be “not unsafe.” 11 Cal. Code Regs. § 4070(a); Cal. Penal Code § 32000(a). California’s roster of “not unsafe” handguns is shrinking, as manufacturers cannot indefinitely support grandfathered models, and the state’s design demands have grown more restrictive. Since 2013, California requires new semiautomatic handguns to stamp ejected shell casings with unique microscopic arrays, but this “microstamping” technology does not exist in the market. California thus bars the acquisition of all semiautomatic handguns designed since 2013. It also bans the acquisition of most semiautomatic handguns for lacking magazine disconnect mechanisms and loaded chamber indicators, though it instructs consumers to disregard these features. Various exemptions from the ban privilege law enforcement, the entertainment industry, and surviving spouses and domestic partners of police officers, among others. The Ninth Circuit upheld California’s handgun prohibition under “intermediate scrutiny,” albeit over a dissent as to the microstamping requirement. The question presented is whether California’s “Unsafe Handgun Act,” Cal. Penal Code § 31900 et seq., violates the Second Amendment by banning handguns of the kind in common use for traditional lawful purposes.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Alan Gura
Institute for Free Speech
For respondent
Joshua Patashnik
California Department of Justice
Proceedings
- Jun 15 2020Petition DENIED.
- Jun 08 2020DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/11/2020.
- Jun 01 2020DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/4/2020.
- May 22 2020DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/28/2020.
- May 18 2020DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/21/2020.
- May 11 2020DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/15/2020.
- Apr 27 2020DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/1/2020.
- Mar 20 2019DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/12/2019.
- Mar 18 2019Reply of petitioners Ivan Pena, et al. filed.
- Mar 06 2019Brief of respondent Martin Horan, Director, California Department of Justice Bureau of Firearms in opposition filed.
- Feb 04 2019Brief amici curiae of States of Texas, et al. filed.
- Feb 04 2019Brief amicus curiae of Cato Institute filed.
- Feb 04 2019Brief amici curiae of Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., et al. filed.
- Feb 01 2019Brief amici curiae of Professors of Second Amendment Law, et al. filed.
- Jan 16 2019Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 6, 2019.
- Jan 11 2019Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 4, 2019 to March 6, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
- Dec 28 2018Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 4, 2019)
- Aug 20 2018Application (18A178) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until December 31, 2018.
- Aug 16 2018Application (18A178) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018, submitted to The Chief Justice.